[{"bbox": [99, 152, 1135, 469], "category": "Text", "text": "were provided through centralised purchasing programmes, leading to **oversupply and accumulation of unused stocks year on year**. Problems due to the **overuse of chemical pesticides** became already visible in Soviet times. Uzbekistan has developed the most progressive programme on bio-pesticides in the Central Asia region. Nevertheless, many elements of pesticide life-cycle management in Uzbekistan still need to be further strengthened to reach the standards as promoted by the FAO and WHO International Code of Conduct on Pesticide Management. Waste management was very basic in the former Soviet Union, with wastes generally being discarded in landfills or being long-term stored at production sites. Due to views prevalent at that time in the scientific and engineering community, incineration and high-temperature incineration was not supported. As a result, **all Central Asian countries today lack strategies and basic infrastructure to treat hazardous wastes according to international standards**. FAO is currently undertaking under a Global Environment Facility (GEF)-funded POPs project enabling activities on POPs disposal in line with the Basel Convention Technical Guidelines in other Central Asian countries."}, {"bbox": [85, 528, 341, 560], "category": "Section-header", "text": "## 2.2 Problem Analysis"}, {"bbox": [99, 585, 1135, 717], "category": "Text", "text": "In recent year Uzbekistan made significant steps towards environmental protection and greening its economy. Nevertheless, a transition towards a sustainable, socially just, resilient and climate neutral economy require addressed deep-seated, structural constraints. Such processes tend to have, broadly, two negative effects: they lower the economic returns of green investments and prevent economic actors from capturing the full value of these investments."}, {"bbox": [99, 730, 1135, 1023], "category": "Text", "text": "Interagency coordination is generally weak in Uzbekistan. When the GoU launched its administrative reform in 2018, it disbanded close to a hundred interagency committees and commissions. New institutions were created to replace them – such as the Coordination Council on SDGs presided by the Prime Minister – but many are not operational. Strategic objectives tend to be broadly coherent but resource allocation and economic policies are not necessarily aligned to further their implementation. In the context of the GESF, this issue is compounded by specific factors including (i) low levels of knowledge on the interactions between the economy and the environment, (ii) unfamiliarity with international cooperation framework around these issues (e.g. the UNFCC and COP), (iii) unfamiliarity with policy instruments available to accelerate and monitor the transition to a green economy, (iv) a lack of reliable data on which to ground the decision and (v) a lack of tools to assess economic and environmental impacts. The GoU has done little so far to address this awareness gap and engage with civil society and the private sector around green and sustainable growth."}, {"bbox": [99, 1033, 1135, 1326], "category": "Text", "text": "Public expenditure and tax are fundamental drivers of the transition to a green and circular economy. Tax and subsidies can provide long-term incentives to households and firms to shift their consumption and investments to greener and more circular activities. Public investment can create the backbone around which new mode of sustainable production can be built – including the infrastructure needed to switch to renewable energy, electric cars or water-efficient agriculture. So far, Uzbekistan has not made good use of fiscal policies to speed up the transition. On the expenditure side, the disjointed nature of green policies and absence of environmental assessment during budget preparation makes it difficult to estimate the amount spent on green goals. Taxation is not yet used to encourage consumers to shift to greener products or incentivise adoption of resource-efficient production or energy-efficient techniques in construction. No policy scheme to put a price on carbon is under consideration – though the GoU wishes to explore the idea as part of its long-term strategy on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission."}, {"bbox": [99, 1326, 1135, 1620], "category": "Text", "text": "Institutional coordination and sound fiscal policies are not enough to implement ambitious green programmes. Tax and spending decisions need to be supported by adequate systems and capacities to be implemented. On the whole, Uzbekistan enjoys a relatively solid PFM system. The results of the latest Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) assessment (2018) have highlighted a high level of fiscal discipline – mostly supported by a very centralised approach to PFM. The drawback of this system is that capacities at the line ministry level are weak. This prevents the structuring of a meaningful MoF/sector dialogue and the alignment of the budget with public policies. Progress made towards programme budgeting and SDG budget-tagging address these shortcoming to a certain extent but are at their very beginning. Risk management in expenditure controls and procurement tends to be very formal and does not take into account the level of risk or the question of performance. The lack of trained administrators and agents prevents the state from streamlining key green objectives into its SOE portfolio – even in sectors where the alignment is obvious (energy, transport, water)."}, {"bbox": [1037, 1680, 1144, 1706], "category": "Page-footer", "text": "Page 6 of 24"}]