JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE: REVIEW OF PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO JISC

The document analyzes 38 Russian and 15 Ukrainian JI projects submitted to the JISC by September 2007. It finds that while Russia has a larger total volume of projected emission reductions, Ukraine's portfolio is more diverse and shows a higher rate of technology transfer and foreign investment relative to its economy. Russia's portfolio is heavily dominated by gas pipeline refurbishment, whereas Ukraine's is led by industrial energy saving and coal mine methane projects. The author attributes these differences to institutional readiness, with Ukraine having established a more effective project approval system than Russia.

• By the end of September 2007, Russia had submitted 38 JI projects and Ukraine had submitted 15 to the JISC.
• Russian JI projects are heavily dominated by gas pipeline refurbishment, which accounts for 60% of its emission reductions and 13 of its 38 projects. In contrast, this project type was completely absent from the Ukrainian portfolio at the time of analysis.
• Ukraine's JI portfolio is primarily composed of industrial energy saving and efficiency projects (49% of emission reductions) and coal mine methane projects (41% of emission reductions), the latter of which were not present in the Russian submissions.
• JI projects in Ukraine demonstrate a higher level of technology transfer, with over 70% involving foreign technology and all projects introducing technology not considered common practice. In Russia, only 35% of projects reported using foreign technology, and domestic suppliers were common.
• There is a significant difference in the concentration of project participants; Russia's activities are concentrated among a few actors (17 foreign actors across 38 projects), while Ukraine shows less concentration with 15 foreign partners involved in 15 projects.
• Japanese investment is significantly stronger in Ukraine than in Russia, partly because the Japanese government designated Ukraine as an official target country for JI investments, while institutional problems and the lack of Kyoto Protocol ratification hindered Russian attractiveness.
• Geographically, Russian projects are distributed across the European side of the Ural mountains, aided by the replicability of gas pipeline projects. Ukrainian projects are highly concentrated, with the majority located in the Donetsk region.
• The disparity in project success and attraction is attributed to institutional differences: Ukraine successfully established a domestic approval system, whereas the Russian administration had yet to approve its first JI project by the time of the report.

APA

Korppoo, A. (2007). JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE: REVIEW OF PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO JISC. Climate Strategies. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ji-pipeline-bp-final1.pdf

Chicago

Korppoo, Anna. JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE: REVIEW OF PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO JISC. Climate Strategies, 2007. https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ji-pipeline-bp-final1.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Korppoo |first1=Anna |title=JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE: REVIEW OF PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO JISC |publisher=Climate Strategies |date=October 2007 |url=https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ji-pipeline-bp-final1.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{korppoo2007joint, author = {Korppoo, Anna}, title = {{JOINT IMPLEMENTATION IN RUSSIA AND UKRAINE: REVIEW OF PROJECTS SUBMITTED TO JISC}}, institution = {Climate Strategies}, year = {2007}, month = oct, url = {https://climatestrategies.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/ji-pipeline-bp-final1.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }