The Assessment and Recommendations present the main findings of the OECD Environmental Performance Review of Slovenia. They identify 43 recommendations to help the country make further progress towards its environmental objectives and international commitments.
OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Slovenia 2026
Abstract
1.1 Addressing key environmental challenges
Slovenia has made progress on decoupling
Slovenia has a small, open economy that enjoyed dynamic growth over 2014-2019. Following a robust recovery from the COVID‑19 pandemic, economic growth has slowed but remained resilient amid multiple shocks (OECD, 2024[1]). These shocks include the Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine and the 2023 floods. Gross domestic product (GDP) is projected to grow by 0.9% in 2025 and by 2.3% in 2026, driven by domestic demand (OECD, 2025[2]).
Over 2010-2024, Slovenia decoupled energy supply, emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and major air pollutants, and to a lesser extent (relative decoupling), freshwater abstractions and municipal waste generation from economic growth (Figure 1). Domestic material consumption, which had declined in the early 2010s, rose in line with GDP over 2020-2023, driven by the post-COVID recovery in the construction sector, before falling in 2024.
Note: LULUCF: land use, land-use change and forestry. NH3: ammonia. NOx: nitrogen oxides. PM2.5: fine particulates. Domestic material consumption is the amount of materials directly used in an economy, or the apparent consumption of materials. It is computed as domestic extraction used minus exports plus imports.
Source: EMEP (2026), WebDab (dataset); IEA (2025), IEA World Energy Statistics and Balances (dataset); OECD (2025), OECD Environment Statistics (dataset); OECD (2025), OECD Economic Outlook (dataset); SURS (2026), SiStat (dataset).
The Slovenian Development Strategy 2030 (GoRS, 2017[3]) aims to ensure a high quality of life for all through balanced economic, social and environmental development. According to the Sustainable and Inclusive Well-being Index,1 the country performs strongly on well-being, inclusiveness and the environment but lags in economic development (IMAD, 2025[4]). Its performance exceeds the European Union (EU) average on most environment-related Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), except for responsible consumption and production (SDG 12) and climate action (SDG 13) due to high related economic losses (Chapter 2) (EC, 2025[5]).
Despite extensive coverage of protected areas, biodiversity is under threat
Located at the intersection of the Alps, the Pannonian Plain, the Dinaric Mountains and the Mediterranean, Slovenia is one of the most biodiverse countries in Europe (Bolješić, 2019[6]). Forests cover about 60% of its land area and 30% is agricultural land. Its coastline stretches less than 50 km.
Although Slovenia compares favourably with the EU average, about 60% of habitats and half of species of conservation importance2 are in an unfavourable state, particularly freshwater ecosystems and grasslands. Agriculture, urbanisation and modification of water regimes are the main pressures on terrestrial habitats and species (ARSO, 2020[7]). Urbanisation is the key pressure on coastal and marine areas (UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC, 2021[8]). In addition, invasive species, new diseases and climate change affect biodiversity (Bolješić, 2019[6]).
With about 40% of terrestrial areas designated for protection (Figure 2), Slovenia has already surpassed the 2030 target of 30%. However, only 5% of marine areas are protected. The possibilities for expanding marine protected areas in a narrow and heavily modified coastal strip are limited. However, Slovenia should step up efforts to protect the remaining natural coastline, address pressures from coastal urbanisation and co‑operate with its neighbours on marine biodiversity conservation (UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC, 2021[8]).
Note: CBD: Convention on Biological Diversity. EEZ: exclusive economic zone. IUCN: International Union for Conservation of Nature. Some protected areas have not been designated under a specific international category. Data exclude “other effective area-based conservation measures”, which are areas achieving sustained long-term outcomes for the in-situ conservation of biodiversity outside of protected areas.
Source: OECD (2025), OECD Environment Statistics (dataset).
The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP), which is an integral part of the National Environmental Action Programme 2020-2030, was updated in line with the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (CBD, 2020[9]). The Natura 2000 Management Programme 2023-2028 and sectoral strategies (e.g. agriculture, forestry) specify the measures to achieve the global goals. An inter-ministerial working group is developing a national plan for nature restoration expected by mid-2026 (MNVP, 2025[10]).
Financing needs for Slovenia’s NBSAP 2030 have been estimated at EUR 47-53 million per year (GoRS, 2020[11]), nearly double public spending on biodiversity over 2014-2020. Despite progress in this area (Hribar and Ribeiro, 2024[12]), a full mapping and economic evaluation of ecosystem services, as conducted in Slovakia (OECD, 2024[13]), is pending. It would justify and support biodiversity action, as well as attract private funding.
Challenges remain in agriculture and forestry
Biodiversity in agricultural land continues to decline, although the Common Farmland Bird Index has decreased at a slower rate than in the EU over 2010-2023. The EU has launched an infringement procedure against Slovenia for the deterioration of several bird and butterfly species in Natura 2000 sites, mainly due to unsustainable agricultural practices (EC, 2024[14]). Intensification of beef and dairy production supported by the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), and forest succession3 in marginal areas with natural constraints, have been key drivers of biodiversity loss (Šumrada, Kmecl and Erjavec, 2021[15]). Agri-environmental measures have insufficiently targeted high nature value grasslands (Machado et al., 2025[16]). To preserve these habitats, Slovenia could develop result-based approaches, which farmers prefer over management-based arrangements (Šumrada et al., 2022[17]).
Slovenia’s 2023-2027 CAP Strategic Plan allocates 40% of its resources to the biodiversity objective, above the EU average of 31% (EC, 2025[18]). Although a large share of agricultural land is part of the Natura 2000 network (24%, twice the EU average), the proportion subject to biodiversity commitments seems low (18% vs. 31% in the EU). Only 6% of Natura 2000 area is under supported commitment (19% in the EU).
Forests are relatively well preserved in terms of natural tree species composition and stand structure (SFS, 2025[19]). More than most European countries, Slovenia practises close-to-nature4 and sustainable forestry (Larsen et al., 2022[20]). It has a low intensity of logging5 and nature conservation has been further integrated into forest management over the past 15 years (MOP, 2020[21]). However, large-scale natural forest disturbances (ice storm, bark beetle outbreaks and windthrows) over 2014-2018 highlighted the timely need for adapting forests to climate change (Chapter 2).
Slovenia benefits from abundant, good quality water resources, but scarcity is an emerging risk and agriculture pressures should be reduced
Freshwater resources are generally abundant, although water scarcity and drought in certain regions are a growing concern exacerbated by climate change (Chapter 2). River flows are declining across the country, with low water levels in some rivers (ARSO, 2025[22]). In a positive development, Slovenia’s Water Management Programme of Measures, updated6 in October 2023, emphasises integrating climate change adaptation and mitigation across various measures. This involves planning for extreme weather events, promoting nature-based solutions and raising public awareness (GoRS, 2023[23]). As water scarcity becomes a more pressing concern, water permits should be periodically reviewed7 and updated to ensure sustainable use of water resources, including ensuring minimum ecological flows. Enhancing resilience of water supply would benefit from clear regulations on alternative sources of supply, such as wastewater re-use.
Slovenia maintains generally good water quality and should continue efforts to reduce agricultural pressures. Just over half of surface water bodies fail to achieve good ecological status due to hydro-morphological pressures, agricultural runoff, pesticides, other chemical pollutants and inadequately treated wastewater. The entire country has been designated as a nitrate vulnerable zone and decrees impose mandatory measures to assure minimum levels of water protection. Consumption of pesticides per hectare of arable land has declined since 2012 (ARSO, 2025[24]) and nitrate levels in groundwater have shown a downward trend (ARSO, 2025[25]). Nevertheless, several of the main aquifers where there is a high share of agricultural land exceed nitrate limit values and 10% of surface water bodies exceed pesticide thresholds (EEA, 2024[26]). Building on progress to date, measures to address diffuse pollution from agriculture should be strengthened. The 2023 Water Management Programme of Measures focuses on reducing agricultural impacts on water quality, mainly through the promotion of good practices and agri-environmental payments from the CAP Strategic Plan 2023‑2027. The policy mix could be broadened, including through the greater use of economic instruments, to improve cost effectiveness and better reflect the Polluter Pays Principle.
Slovenia has a variety of economic instruments for water management in place, targeting the most significant water uses (OECD, 2023[27]), but they have limited effectiveness in supporting water management objectives (CoA, 2022[28]). The regulation on water abstraction permits was updated in 2025 so that the permit fee will better reflect the opportunity cost of the water allocated. Water abstraction charges are also in place for most types of water use. In addition, a wastewater tax applies to municipal and industrial wastewater discharges. The tax burden is reduced for municipal wastewater when discharged into a sewage system with adequate levels of treatment. With expanded wastewater treatment, revenues from the wastewater tax declined by 48% between 2012 and 2024 in real terms (OECD, 2026[29]), a reflection of the improvement in wastewater treatment and decline in environmental pollution from municipal wastewater.
Slovenia has made progress on wastewater collection and treatment, but compliance gaps remain
The highly fragmented water and sanitation sector faces high costs of service provision and affordability issues, especially in small municipalities, and has been lacking a robust framework for monitoring utility performance. There are nearly 100 water utilities, 80% of which serve about a quarter of the population. Water losses in public water supply are relatively high due to ageing infrastructure and deferred maintenance, and may also point to potential issues with utility performance. Slovenia does not have an economic regulator for water supply and sanitation (WSS) services. Slovenia performs relatively well compared to other EU countries in recovering the costs of water supply, wastewater collection and treatment, although there is scope for improvement (EC, 2021[30]). The 2025 law on Drinking Water Supply and Urban Wastewater Collection and Treatment strengthened the legal framework for public WSS services. The law enhances national oversight of the sector, including a centralised information system to report on efficiency of public service delivery. It also provides a more robust basis for sustainable cost recovery and requires integrating climate change projections into the planning, construction and maintenance of WSS infrastructure. This is a key development that should strengthen the sector’s performance, and improve transparency and accountability.
Slovenia has made significant progress in the expansion of wastewater collection and treatment but still lags other OECD Members. Investment in water supply and wastewater infrastructure has increased in recent years. The share of population connected to urban wastewater treatment rose from around half of the population in 2012 to nearly 70% in 2023. Still, further efforts are needed to comply with the EU Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD) (Figure 3). Closing the compliance gap is a pressing priority, especially since the revised UWWTD entered into force on 1 January 2025 with requirements to further transform the sector. Reaching compliance will require continuing to mobilise significant investment, but there remains a mismatch between high investment needs, and technical and financial capacity, especially for small municipalities.
Note: Proportion of urban wastewater that meets all UWWTD requirements (collection, biological treatment, biological treatment with nitrogen and/or phosphorus removal).
Source: EEA (2024), Waterbase – Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive – Reported data.
Recycling is high, but municipal waste generation continues to rise
In 2023, recycling and composting together accounted for over 70% of municipal waste treatment (OECD, 2025[31]), the highest rate in the EU. Slovenia is on track to meet 2025 recycling and 2035 landfill reduction targets. Progress was driven by widespread separate collection (paper and cardboard, metals, plastics, glass and bio-waste), a landfill tax (2000) and a ban on landfilling biodegradable waste (2011) (EEA, 2025[32]). However, municipal waste generation continues to rise (Figure 1). Although a pay-as-you-throw system is in place, pricing rarely reflects actual waste weight.
Slovenia adopted waste management plans (2016, 2022) and enhanced its waste information system, addressing OECD recommendations (OECD, 2012[33]). Reform of the extended producer responsibility system (EPR) aims to better apply the Polluter Pays Principle, among other goals (Berger et al., 2023[34]). Introducing advanced EPR fee modulation, as planned, would encourage the use of recyclable and reduced packaging. Slovenia has a voluntary deposit refund system (DRS) for some reusable beverage containers (glass, plastic), but their market share is limited (Wilcox and Mackenzie, 2021[35])). A law proposing a DRS for single-use plastic bottles and cans is under discussion (National Assembly, 2025[36]). The law could increase the quantity and quality of collected materials. However, Slovenia should establish methods for arbitration between producers, the DRS operator and existing producer responsibility organisations to address overlaps or compensation for services rendered (Laubinger et al., 2022[37]). Setting quotas for reusable beverage containers put on the market, as in Austria, would support waste reduction (OECD, 2026[38]).
Slovenia's circular material use rate remains below the EU average (10% vs.12% in 2024), likely due to the high share of non-metallic minerals in domestic material consumption. The country developed a circular economy (CE) roadmap in 2018 and amended the green public procurement rules to include CE criteria. It has not set specific CE targets (ETC CE, 2024[39]). Various initiatives have been launched, such as the “Decarbonising Slovenia: The Deep Demonstration of a Circular, Regenerative and Low-Carbon Economy” demonstration project and the Slovenian Centre for CE. Their results remain to be assessed.
1.2. Promoting investment and economic instruments for green growth
Slovenia should continue to work towards using EU funds for green investment more effectively
Public environmental protection expenditure increased to 0.9% of GDP in 2023, slightly above the EU average of 0.8%. This reflects municipal investment in wastewater treatment and the increase in government subsidies to reduce GHG emissions. The trend in spending on environmental protection is shaped by the absorption of EU funds.
Over 2021-2027, Slovenia will benefit from EUR 6.6 billion in EU funding via the Recovery and Resilience Facility (MF, 2025[40]),8 the Cohesion policy (EC, 2026[41])9 and the CAP (EC, 2025[42]). Of this total, EUR 2.2 billion (about 3.5% of 2023 GDP) will be allocated to green measures. Timely and efficient absorption will be critical to boost green investment.
Slovenia dedicated 45% of its Recovery and Resilience Plan10 (RRP) budget to climate objectives, exceeding the EU requirement and prioritising the modernisation of railway infrastructure and flood risk reduction (Chapter 2). In December 2025, the country had received more than 70% of its RRP allocations and about 40% for the green transition (EC, 2026[43]). Like other EU countries, Slovenia experienced delays in implementation due to insufficient assessment of planned measures; lengthy public procurement and project preparation; supply chain disruptions; unclear responsibilities during the change of government in 2022; and reporting deficiencies (CoA, 2025[44]). The government has taken corrective measures, including to improve the public procurement system (OECD, 2025[45]), and has amended the RRP to improve its achievability (CoA, 2025[44]).
Three-quarters of investments planned under the “Greener Europe” objective11 of the Cohesion policy were decided by December 2025 (vs. 62% in the EU) (EC, 2026[41]). Sustainable water management and climate change adaptation – particularly flood risk reduction – accounted for more than half of the selected projects.
Slovenia estimates that it needs another EUR 7 billion in investment over 2021‑2030 to meet its 2030 climate targets (GoRS, 2024[46]). Of this, around EUR 2.2 billion is expected from the public sector for rail infrastructure, sustainable mobility and public buildings. The government plans to mobilise environmentally related tax revenue, EU funds and the proceeds from its sustainability-linked sovereign bond, the first in the EU to be tied to climate targets12 (MOPE, 2025[47]). Ensuring predictable revenue streams will be key to closing the investment gap.
Slovenia can be commended for shifting investment from road to rail, supported in part by EU funding. In 2022‑2023, more than half of transport infrastructure investment went to rail, up from one-third in 2016‑2017.
Identifying and assisting people in energy and transport poverty remains challenging
To mitigate the effects of high energy prices, Slovenia implemented various measures at a fiscal cost of 3% of GDP in 2022‑2023. However, it did not sufficiently target the most vulnerable groups. Some measures, such as energy tax reliefs and caps on electricity and gas prices, limited the incentive to save energy and invest in low-carbon technologies (OECD, 2024[1]); some were phased out in 2024. However, from an environmental and fiscal perspective, more targeted support would have preserved the price signal while supporting those most in need.
In 2024, 7% of households were energy poor according to Slovenian definition,13 down from 11% in 2014 (SURS, 2025[48]). Since 2010, social assistance recipients can receive free energy advice and grants covering the full cost of thermal insulation and heating system replacement. This has helped to increase the share of the population living in dwellings with improved energy efficiency (IMAD, 2025[4]), a key factor in energy poverty. Slovenia has adopted a plan to reduce the share of energy-poor households to 3.8-4.6% by 2030 (GoRS, 2023[49]). However, progress to date is below expectations (MOPE, 2025[50]), highlighting the need to secure funding and develop regional advice points and awareness-raising networks to better reach and assist people in energy poverty.
Slovenia is developing a Social Climate Plan to monitor and reduce energy and transport poverty. Transport poverty affected around 3.5%14 of the population in 2023 (Gabrovec et al., 2024[51]). The National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP) aims to reduce the share of the population without satisfactory public transport from 20% to 10% by 2030 and to 0% by 2050.
Fiscal policies could better integrate environmental goals
Together with taxing environmentally harmful activities and phasing out environmentally harmful subsidies, implementing green budgeting was part of the 2022 coalition agreement (Fiscal Council, 2022[52]). Slovenia has made progress on green budgeting. A pilot analysis found that budgetary support for the environment in 2016 was more than offset by harmful measures (MF, 2018[53]). The project led to the adoption of a green tagging methodology (2023), which was expected to be fully implemented by 2025. Strengthening reporting and fully integrating green budgeting into fiscal planning would help steer public spending towards environmental objectives.
Revenue from environmentally related taxes decreased from 4.4% of GDP in 2015‑2016 to 2.8% in 2024. As in most other countries, energy taxes, especially on road fuels, make up the bulk of this revenue. This is particularly true for Slovenia, which has high transport fuel consumption. This consumption has remained broadly stable since the mid-2010s, except during the COVID‑19 crisis. The drop in revenue was driven by fuel tax cuts until 2022 and the suspension of the carbon tax over 2022‑2023, in response to increasing energy prices. Revenue from environmentally related taxes rose slightly in 2024, driven by higher fuel taxes and the near doubling of the carbon tax rate (to EUR 30.85/tCO2). Revenue from the carbon tax remains modest compared to that from fuel excise taxes.
Revenue from environmentally related taxes by tax base, 2010-2024
Source SURS (2025), SiStat (dataset).
Slovenia’s average effective carbon rate15 (EUR 89 per tonne of CO2)) was on par with the EU average in 2023 (OECD, 2026[54]). However, with the reduction of energy and carbon taxes, the average effective carbon rate has fallen sharply since 2021, weakening incentives to reduce GHG emissions. The country needs gradual and predictable increases in carbon prices to achieve its climate goals. Reaching EUR 140 per tonne of CO2 by 2030 would help achieve its mitigation target (IMAD, 2025[4]). Recycling higher revenue to reduce the tax burden on labour, and support low-carbon investment and vulnerable groups, would ensure economic growth and sustainable development.
Carbon prices cover a large share of Slovenia’s emissions. However, they do not provide consistent incentives across sectors and fuels. Emissions from buildings, agriculture and other GHGs – methane and nitrous oxide – face lower prices. Diesel is still taxed at lower rates than petrol, despite its higher carbon content and local air pollution cost. In the industrial sector, natural gas – while less carbon-intensive – faces higher fuel excise and carbon tax rates than coal and non-renewable waste (OECD, 2025[55]). While the EU ETS2 will raise carbon prices in buildings and road transport, the Climate Act provision to automatically cut excise duties to offset higher carbon prices is causing concern (Climate Council, 2025[56]).
The NECP aims to phase out fossil fuel subsidies by 2030, but it lacks specific milestones to achieve this goal. Like other OECD Member countries, Slovenia supports oil consumption through tax expenditures. These include the partial refund on excise duty for diesel used in commercial transport and stationary motors, and a reduced rate for diesel used in agricultural and forestry machinery, as well as exemptions for aviation and navigation. The country supports coal through tax reductions and exemptions in some energy-intensive industries. Since 2025, it has also supported operation of the Šoštanj coal-fired thermal power plant and the Velenje coal mine (Chapter 2). The country also encourages use of natural gas in combined heat and power plants through feed-in-tariffs and has largely subsidised business to compensate for higher prices during the energy crisis. Continued support to fossil fuel use is slowing the transition.
Biodiversity
Conduct comprehensive mapping and economic evaluation of Slovenia’s ecosystem services to support biodiversity action and attract private funding.
Encourage biodiversity-friendly farming practices through the CAP 2023‑2027, Cohesion policy or other instruments such as LIFE programmes, especially on grasslands in the Natura 2000 network. Develop result-based support programmes and remove environmentally harmful agricultural support.
Water
Periodically review and update water permits to ensure sustainable use of water resources, avoid over-allocation in the context of increasing scarcity and ensure minimum ecological flows; consider increasing abstraction charges, particularly in areas at risk of water shortages.
Consider a broader range of policies to address diffuse pollution from agriculture, including through greater use of economic instruments to improve cost effectiveness and better reflect the Polluter Pays Principle; ensure enforcement of regulations on pesticide use to meet requirements of the Plant Protection Products Act.
Allocate adequate resources to implement and enforce the 2025 law on Drinking Water Supply and Urban Wastewater Collection and Treatment in an effective manner to enhance national oversight and performance of water and sanitation service providers.
Promote co‑operation or consolidation of WSS service providers where geographically, economically and technically possible to achieve economies of scale, improve cost effectiveness of investments and service delivery efficiency; develop a clear and realistic financing strategy to ensure compliance with UWWTD requirements and meet water management goals.
Waste and circular economy
Strengthen waste prevention measures, including by introducing advanced fee modulation and setting mandatory shares for reusable beverage containers put on the market. Reform the extended producer responsibility system, as planned.
Introduce circular economy targets in priority sectors (construction, the food system, forest-based value chains, mobility and manufacturing industry) and develop indicators to track progress of initiatives promoting the circular economy.
Promoting investment and economic instruments for green growth
Speed up absorption of EU funds; simplify and accelerate public procurement procedures, ensuring proper safeguards and transparency; strengthen project appraisal and ex post assessment through improved co‑ordination across ministries and enhanced capacity in ministries and municipalities.
Implement the action plan to reduce energy poverty; secure long-term funding and develop support structures to better reach and assist energy-poor households, avoiding energy price support measures. Develop and implement the plan to address transport poverty, improving access to public transport.
Systematically screen the measures proposed in the Budget Bill, including tax expenditure, against their environmental impact and regularly report on green budgeting to better align fiscal and environmental objectives.
Plan for gradual and predictable increases in carbon prices to achieve climate goals and set milestones to phase out fossil fuel subsidies.
2.1 Trends in environmental pressures and progress to targets
Slovenia faces the dual challenge of reducing its greenhouse gas (GHG) and air pollution emissions while adapting to climate change impacts. Extreme events like the catastrophic 2023 floods underscore the need for stronger resilience measures. Air pollution still has severe health and economic impacts, with about 500 premature deaths per million inhabitants linked to particulate matter (PM2.5) – well above the EU average.
Slovenia is increasingly vulnerable to climate-related impacts
In 2024, Slovenia experienced its warmest year on record, with temperatures 2°C above the 1981-2010 baseline. Its vulnerability to climate hazards is increasing and exposure to river flooding is above EU averages (Figure 5, panel A). In August 2023, the country experienced its worst disaster on record. Torrential rains caused widespread flooding, affecting over two-thirds of the territory, resulting in damages estimated at EUR 10 billion – 16% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2023. This event highlights Slovenia’s acute economic exposure, with the highest climate-related losses in the EU as a share of GDP (Figure 5, panel B). Flood risk is expected to increase in the coming decades, although decisive adaptation action can reduce exposure and vulnerability.
Beyond flooding, Slovenia faces a broad range of climate-related risks across its diverse landscapes. For example, the country faces droughts affecting agriculture in areas such as the Vipava Valley, as well as wildfires like the blaze in the Karst region in 2022 that covered 3 705 hectares (ha). Urban heatwaves are growing more frequent and severe, with projections of nine additional hot days annually under a high global emissions scenario. Shifting precipitation patterns also increase the risk of landslides and erosion.
Note: Panel A: river flood risk is measured using a ten-year return period. A return period is the average or estimated time that a specific hazard is likely to recur. Data for population exposure refer to 2020. Estimates are based on the river flood hazard maps and the Global Human Settlement Layer population grid data developed by the European Commission Joint Research Centre. Panel B: Slovenia’s value is heavily influenced by the August 2023 floods, a 1‑in‑100‑year event that significantly increased damages for that year.
Source: EEA (2024), Economic Losses from Weather- and Climate-related Events; OECD (2025), River Flooding Exposure (dataset).
Slovenia successfully reduced GHG and air pollutant emissions and met past targets
Emissions of GHGs and most air pollutants in Slovenia peaked in the late 2000s and then decreased (Figure 6). By 2023, GHG emissions had declined by 32% below their 2008 peak thanks to gains in energy efficiency, less coal use and a cleaner energy mix, mostly concentrated in the power and residential sectors, as well as in its large energy-intensive industrial sector. Transport emissions remain problematic. The country still experiences poor air quality, particularly in the winter months. Major emission drivers are residential wood burning for PM2.5, agriculture for ammonia (NH3), transport for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and industry for non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs). Sulphur oxide (SO2) emissions from electricity generation dropped significantly.
Slovenia’s land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector has historically been a strong carbon sink but became a net emitter between 2014 and 2018 due to unprecedented natural disturbances. Although it recovered in 2019, the sink remains weaker than in the past. The LULUCF sink is not expected to return to earlier levels, owing to limited potential for afforestation, the effects of climate change and the maturity of Slovenia’s forest, which limits the sector’s absorption capacity (see further below).
Slovenia successfully met its GHG emissions and air pollution targets. It met the Kyoto Protocol commitments (UNFCCC, 2024[57]), achieved the EU 2020 commitments for the effort-sharing sectors – sectors outside the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) – and fulfilled obligations related to air pollution under the EU National Emission reduction Commitments (NEC).
Note: Panel A: LULUCF: land use, land-use change and forestry. Dashed lines = projections with additional measures. The 2045 target was calculated to correspond to LULUCF projections (EEA 27 October 2025). The kink of emissions in 2033 is related to the coal phase-out. Panel B: Emission trends and reduction targets under the EU National Emission Ceilings Directive (2016/2284/EC) on the reduction of national emissions of certain atmospheric pollutants (NEC). Dashed lines = projections with additional measures.
Source: GoRS (2024), Updated Comprehensive National Energy and Climate Plan of the Republic of Slovenia, December; EEA (2025), Member States' Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission Projections 2025 (dataset); MECE (2025), Informative Inventory Report: Slovenia 2025.
Emissions targets are ambitious, requiring significant efforts to achieve
The 2025 Climate Act advanced its net-zero target from 2050 to 2045, five years ahead of the EU collective goal. Slovenia also plans to cut non-EU ETS emissions by at least 28% by 2030 and reduce total GHG emissions by 55% by 2033, from 2005 levels. Reaching its 2033 and 2045 targets will require annual emission cuts of 4.8% and 8.2%, respectively, as of 2024. This would be nearly two to three times higher than the 2.6% average annual reduction achieved between the 2008 peak and 2023.
Reaching Slovenia’s air pollution and GHG emissions targets will require substantial efforts. Although Slovenia is on track to achieve its 2030 targets under the EU Effort Sharing Regulation with additional measures according to the National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP), it is expected to miss both its 2033 and 2045 GHG emissions targets (Figure 6). The 2025 Air Pollution Inventory Report projects that Slovenia will meet its 2030 targets for SO2 and NOX, but fall short on NMVOCs and NH3, and narrowly miss on PM2.5 with additional measures (MECE, 2025[58]). Achieving both GHG and air pollution targets depend on fully implementing and strengthening measures under the NECP and the National Air Pollution Control Programme (NAPCP).
2.2. Climate governance
The 2025 Climate Act is a significant improvement, but important gaps remain
After over a decade in the making, the Climate Act was adopted in 2025, setting a formal pathway to achieve climate neutrality by 2045 and enhance climate resilience. The Act strengthens the institutional framework in several ways. First, it improves vertical and horizontal co‑ordination. Second, it strengthens the monitoring system on mitigation goals aligned with EU requirements and requires additional action if targets are not met. The Act also mandates the renewal of the Strategic Framework for Climate Change Adaptation (NAS), informed by climate risk and vulnerability assessments of priority sectors to be conducted every five years. In addition, it requires the development of a monitoring and evaluation framework for adaptation, including indicators.
Despite being a major step forward, the Act lacks several key provisions. It does not commit to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies (Chapter 1). Indeed, it introduces a new subsidy that allows offsetting EU ETS2-related CO2 price increases through reduced taxes and levies on energy products until 2030 (Climate Council, 2025[59]). It also does not include mandatory interim emissions targets, e.g. for 2035 and 2040, reducing accountability for staying on a credible path to the 2045 goal. Finally, the first Climate Change Mitigation Report prepared under the Act did not systematically assess the effectiveness of individual measures, as noted by the Climate Council (GoRS, 2025[60]).
Mitigation and air pollution strategies are well developed, but adaptation is still nascent
Slovenia has implemented several strategies to achieve its climate mitigation and air pollution goals. The 2021 long-term low emissions development strategy (LT-LEDS) provides the strategic framework and targets climate neutrality by 2050 with sectoral targets for 2040 and 2050. The LT-LEDS is being updated to align with the Climate Act and the 2045 net-zero target.
The NECP and the NAPCP guide reductions in GHG and air pollution emissions by 2030 and indicate trajectories thereafter. Measures across both strategies are well co-ordinated and supported by EU requirements. These cross-cutting strategies are complemented by targeted strategies focussing on agriculture, transport, industry and coal phase-out, among others.
By contrast, adaptation planning is still at an early stage, although efforts have accelerated in recent years. The 2016 NAS laid out a long-term vision but lacked measurable targets; a dedicated National Adaptation Plan never followed. Sectoral and regional adaptation efforts remained fragmented, hindered by insufficient climate risk data and institutional capacity. To address these gaps, Slovenia launched the Life4Adapt project in 2025 to strengthen implementation of the renewed NAS through pilot projects, a climate data centre within the Environment Agency (ARSO), multi-level governance, capacity building, financing mechanisms and public education.
Horizontal and vertical co-ordination need to be strengthened
Slovenia has improved horizontal co‑ordination, but gaps remain. It created the Interdepartmental Working Group for International Climate Issues to develop positions in climate negotiations in 2022 and an inter-ministerial group to support the transition to a low-carbon economy in 2023. The earlier inter-ministerial Working Group on Climate Change Adaptation, created in 2016, was discontinued.
While the legal framework for integrating adaptation across sectors is improving, uneven implementation capacity for sectoral and regional adaptation risks undermining progress. As required by the Climate Act, new or amended sectoral legislation must integrate climate considerations, as seen in the Agriculture Act amended in November 2025. This is an important step as adaptation has not yet been systematically embedded across sectoral policies. Prior to the Act, only agriculture, forestry, water management and tourism sectors had developed risk assessments and adaptation plans. In addition, while disaster risk management falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence, stronger co-ordination with the Ministry of Environment, Climate and Energy (MOPE) is needed for coherent implementation of the 2024‑2030 Resolution on Disaster Protection.
Climate risk and vulnerability assessments are mandatory for key sectors and regional development councils are required to develop regional Adaptation Action Plans (AAPs). However, implementation requirements remain unclear as there is no explicit obligation for sectors to define adaptation actions or to undertake costing, monitoring and enforcement. Supporting the preparation of AAPs will require consistent technical support and dedicated funding for regions. A standardised template, including key elements like expected impacts, milestones and monitoring indicators, would help ensure consistency and quality.
Vertical co‑ordination remains challenging, although some progress is being made. Slovenia has 12 statistical regions, but they do not have governance powers. As a result, the 212 municipalities, most of which are small and have limited capacity, are responsible for environmental management at the subnational level. Public adaptation funding is fragmented across multiple sources, making it difficult for municipalities to access and plan long-term investments. As regional councils prepare the AAPs, close co‑ordination with municipalities is essential as they control many key adaptation levers such as spatial planning, infrastructure maintenance and aspects of water management like stormwater drainage. Co‑ordination should go deeper than consultation to ensure adaptation measures are fully reflected in municipal spatial plans and local investment programmes.
Involvement of civil society has strengthened considerably, yet obstacles remain
Civil society is strongly involved in decision making. The Environmental Protection Act provides individuals and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) with legal standing to participate in and challenge environmental decisions. Restrictions on civil society participation introduced during COVID-19 were repealed in 2022, restoring these rights.
Under the NECP, Slovenia held three rounds of public consultations with local authorities and civil society from 2022 to 2024, although civil society was not involved in developing the NAPCP. Despite this progress, better co‑ordination, communication and early involvement will be needed to increase civil society support for energy infrastructure projects, which have faced public opposition (see below).
In 2023, the country established the Climate Council as an independent scientific advisory body that monitors implementation of the NECP, the LT-LEDS and the NAS. It is composed of nine experts nominated by universities, the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Art, and NGOs. Strengthening the Council mandate and resourcing would enhance its ability to support ministries, provide timely advice and deepen public engagement. Key measures include creating a permanent secretariat, expanding analytical capacity and increasing resources.
2.3. Cross-sectoral adaptation and mitigation measures
Climate risk data are improving, but uptake remains limited
Slovenia has built a solid foundation of climate hazard data, particularly for floods, through updated hazard maps from ARSO and alignment with the EU Floods Directive. It has also progressed on droughts, landslides and wildfires with public portals offering climate projections and environmental indicators. However, the use of these data to inform adaptation planning remains limited due to challenges in accessibility and communication, insufficient analytical capacity and a lack of tailored sector-specific climate information. The planned national centre for climate analysis and forecast under Life4Adapt is a promising step to address this gap.
Investments in flood resilience are significant, but key gaps remain
Slovenia has met its EU obligations on flood risk, including conducting assessments, mapping hazards and developing Flood Risk Management Plans (FRMPs). The most recent round of FRMPs (2022‑2027) considered climate but could be improved with clearer measures (EC, 2025[61]). Following the August 2023 floods, Slovenia had spent EUR 1.2 billion on reconstruction by the end of September 2025 alongside fast-tracking a reconstruction law. The government planned to allocate an additional EUR 2.3 billion by 2028 (GoRS, 2025[62]). A Flood Recovery Co‑ordination Group and a new Government Office were established to oversee reconstruction. Slovenia is also expanding nature-based solutions for flood risk management, prioritised under the Climate Act, with projects like floodplain reconnection and wetland restoration.
Despite national prioritisation of flood resilience, important gaps remain. Municipalities struggle to update and enforce spatial planning; cumbersome administrative procedures lead to delays; financial incentives for private risk reduction are misaligned; and infrastructure standards do not consistently integrate climate risk (see below).
Adaptation is not systematically integrated into planning and permitting
Although national data on flood risk are available, their use at the municipal level is uneven. Many municipalities lack the capacity to update spatial plans, resulting in outdated maps. Following the 2023 floods, the government committed to updating nationwide flood risk data by 2026 (MNVP, 2025[63]). These advances will only translate to reduced exposure if municipal spatial plans are systematically updated and enforced to reflect best available hazard data, which has proven challenging. New approaches are needed to ensure consistent usage of flood risk data, preventing reconstruction in exposed areas and improving the efficiency of recovery spending.
The government has developed national guidance for infrastructure practitioners on “climate proofing”, yet knowledge and capacity remain uneven among implementing bodies. Climate risk assessments are mandatory for major projects subject to environmental impact assessment (EIA) and infrastructure co-funded by the EU. However, this creates a gap as many nationally funded infrastructure projects are not required to undergo an EIA, undermining risk-informed decisions.
Adaptation finance remains insufficient and overly reactive
Investments in climate resilience are cost effective, yielding an estimated savings of EUR 5-7 in recovery costs for each Euro invested, but they are under-prioritised (EIB, 2024[64]). Despite these strong returns, less than 10% of the Climate Fund Spending Programme (2025‑2028) is allocated to adaptation measures.
Public budgets alone cannot meet adaptation needs. The August 2023 floods alone caused an estimated EUR 10 billion in damages, making it essential to mobilise private finance and incentivise private actors to invest in resilience. Innovative financing mechanisms planned under Life4Adapt – such as Green Bonds – are encouraging. Taxes and fees can also raise funds and provide incentives to reduce exposure to climate risks, following the Beneficiary Pays Principle. Strengthening insurance coverage would also increase risk awareness, incentivise risk reduction and encourage private investments in adaptation.
Slovenia’s approach to climate resilience funding remains largely reactive to shocks, focussing on disaster recovery rather than proactive adaptation. Following the 2023 floods, removal orders for high-risk buildings helped prevent reconstruction in flood-prone areas, but resilience was not a systematic criterion in rebuilding efforts. Challenges such as outdated municipal spatial plans, limited guidance for municipalities and a lack of preparedness on how to “build back better” by design hindered the full integration of adaptation into reconstruction. Addressing these gaps could turn recovery into an opportunity to enhance long-term resilience, ensuring efficient use of public funds.
The current approach disincentivises risk reduction and creates significant contingent liabilities for the government. Only 3% of economic losses from climate extremes were insured, one of the lowest rates in the EU (EEA, 2025[65]). This leaves the central government as the primary risk bearer. In addition, recovery funding for both private actors and municipalities is not conditional on prior risk-reduction actions, further limiting incentives to reduce exposure. The country has not conducted a comprehensive assessment of its financial exposure linked to climate-related disasters.
Climate mitigation action increased, but more needs to be done
Slovenia has substantially accelerated climate mitigation action in recent years, in line with other OECD and EU-27 countries (Figure 7). However, it still has significant scope to step up climate policies, notably in the area of market-based instruments, such as phasing out fossil fuel support and carbon pricing (Chapter 1). Climate action also remains below OECD and EU-27 averages in the buildings and electricity sectors.
Note: Climate action is measured as a combination of policy adoption and policy stringency on a scale from 0 (no climate action) to 10 (strong action). Market-based instruments include carbon pricing and environmentally beneficial subsides. Non market-based instruments include standards and regulatory instruments.
Source: Based on Nachtigall et al. (2022[66]), The Climate Actions and Policies Measurement Framework: A Structured and Harmonised Climate Policy Database to Monitor Countries' Mitigation Action; OECD (2024[67]), Pricing Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2024: Gearing Up to Bring Emissions Down; OECD (2025[68]), Climate Actions and Policies Measurement Framework.
2.4. Sectoral adaptation and mitigation measures
Climate risks to the power sector are rising; measures to increase resilience are needed
The power sector is highly vulnerable to climate impacts. Extreme events, like the 2023 floods, have damaged energy infrastructure, while rising temperatures strain generation and transmission systems. Increasing temperatures, higher variability in precipitation and droughts are expected to compromise power production from hydro plants and the nuclear power plant in Krško, which is jointly owned with Croatia. Hydro summer output is expected to decline, as seen in 2022 when the Solkan plant shut down due to low flow of the Soča River. Diversifying into solar and wind – foreseen in the NECP – can help meet summer demand and reduce climate-related risks. While the NECP did not assess climate risk, an energy‑sector climate risk and vulnerability assessment mandated by the Climate Act has been completed, providing a basis for resilience measures.
Renewable energy deployment has accelerated, but the pace is not sufficient to meet 2030 targets
Carbon intensity of electricity generation almost halved between 2010 and 2024 and is below the EU-27 average, mainly due to nuclear, hydro and solar energy. However, progress is slowing as wind deployment remains minimal with only three turbines and no new installations in over ten years. New wind and hydro plants have faced delays due to local opposition, permitting issues and frequent legislative changes, creating policy uncertainty. Renewables now make up 43% of electricity production but trail neighbouring countries and the EU-27. Achieving the 55% renewable electricity target by 2030 will require faster deployment and removal of barriers, especially as demand rises due to electrification.
Slovenia aims to reconcile renewable energy expansion with protection of health, biodiversity and agricultural land, but these constraints limit deployment potential. In view of the opposition to new energy projects, the country prioritises deployment with the lowest adverse effects on biodiversity, as well as health goals such as reduced noise. Fully exploiting all low-risk renewable options, as indicated in the NECP, would increase renewable generation by a maximum of nine percentage points, falling short of the 2030 target (GoRS, 2024[46]). Hence, moving towards higher risk renewable options, while managing the trade-offs with biodiversity and health goals, is warranted to reach the 2030 renewable target and future goals.
Despite some progress, further efforts are needed to address other barriers to renewables deployment, including grid bottlenecks, complex permitting and limited municipal capacity. The government plans to invest EUR 3.5 billion in electricity grids by 2032 to resolve grid bottlenecks, which have slowed the integration of new renewables. Legislative reforms such as the 2023 Renewable Energy Sources Act reclassifies renewables and grid infrastructure as assets of overriding public interest, easing permitting and reducing legal risks. In 2025, Slovenia transposed the EU Renewable Energy Directive III, which is expected to further speed up permitting. However, only 1 of 12 national spatial plans for wind launched in 2019 had been adopted by 2024, illustrating the scale of implementation challenges.
Sharing the benefits from renewable projects with municipalities, as well as community-led energy projects, can ease local resistance, but the latter remain underused. The central government offers EUR 200 000 per MW of wind power installed to municipalities granting construction permits and requires developers to invest 3% of profits in the local community. International experience shows that local opposition drops when municipalities receive financial benefits from wind projects (Germeshausen, Heim and Wagner, 2025[69]). However, it is too early to evaluate the effectiveness of these measures in Slovenia. Unlocking community energy potential would support both social acceptance and faster renewable rollout (Kirkegaard et al., 2023[70]), but this approach remains limited in Slovenia due to complex administrative procedures and unclear market regulations.
Coal phase-out can be accelerated; stronger planning is needed to manage risks
Slovenia aims to phase out coal by 2033, later than most EU countries, but earlier than countries with higher coal shares such as Germany. The country’s largest coal plant in Šoštanj was brought online in 2014 at a cost of EUR 1.2 billion – nearly 2% of GDP (EBRD, 2019[71]). The plant, which runs on lignite from the nearby Velenje mine, faces early closure as production costs escalate. Production costs increased due to several factors, such as high EU ETS prices – a factor that was already well known but not sufficiently considered in planning. In 2025, the government intervened with EUR 403 million to maintain operations through April 2027, supporting 9 500 jobs and heating for 35 000 residents. A clear, transparent timeline for phase-out after April 2027 is still missing, creating uncertainty for workers and investors. Continuing to subsidise coal operations is increasingly costly and diverts public funds from cleaner alternatives. Annual costs of around EUR 200 million are double the annual funding for renewable energy and amount to over EUR 21 000 per direct job per year. Accelerating the coal phase-out would free up funds for infrastructure investments to support alternative economic opportunities of the coal region. Robust cost-benefit analysis, factoring in production cost increases, could have prevented the construction of the Šoštanj plant and should guide future energy projects.
Nuclear expansion needs careful assessment
Expansion of nuclear power remains an option but needs to be assessed carefully. In 2023, Slovenia extended operation of the Krško nuclear plant to 2043. A planned 2024 referendum on capacity expansion was cancelled after legal challenges. The updated NECP sets a final decision by 2028, aiming for construction to begin in 2032. Construction costs are estimated between EUR 9.6 billion and EUR 15.4 billion (15-25% of 2023 GDP), depending on the capacity installed. Yet, there is significant legal and financial uncertainty. Recent European nuclear projects faced cost overruns and delays (OECD, 2024[72]), raising concerns about the plant’s ability to meet Slovenia’s mid- and long-term mitigation targets. Transparent public consultation and thorough assessment of the alignment between nuclear investment and Slovenia’s climate objectives; affordability concerns; and grid flexibility are vital to fostering public trust and investor confidence.
Transport accounts for most emissions; stronger efforts are needed to meet targets
Slovenia’s transport sector is the largest contributor to GHG emissions, accounting for 36% of the national total – the second highest share in the EU-27. GHG emissions grew strongly until 2008, driven by increased travel demand, car dependency, road transit freight and widespread commuting. They plateaued in the 2010s, dropped during COVID‑19, but then rebounded strongly. Transport is also the largest source of NOₓ and a significant source of PM emissions, which worsens air quality, especially in traffic-heavy urban areas. The ageing vehicle fleet, with 49% diesel cars in 2024, further increases pollution; diesel vehicles usually emit more NOₓ and PM than petrol cars. Slovenia also has a greater reliance on cars and lower public transport use than the EU average.
Slovenia is obliged to reduce economy-wide NOx emissions by 65% by 2030. It also aims to reduce transport-related GHG emissions by 1% by 2030 compared to 2005 (19% reduction compared to 2023). The country expects to reach its GHG target with additional measures such as increased investments in sustainable transport infrastructure. However, without additional measures, transport emissions are expected to rise by 41% by 2030 compared to 2005, highlighting the challenges ahead.
Efforts to reduce car dependency need to be strengthened
Ljubljana has made notable progress in reducing car dependency from which other cities can learn. In response to the rise in motorised traffic in the early 2000s, Ljubljana adopted its Vision 2025, which created one of Europe’s largest pedestrian zones and promoted sustainable transport. The city also introduced park-and-ride facilities, expanded bike hire, upgraded its bus network and built extensive cycling infrastructure, dedicating nearly 10% of its road network to cyclists (Virdo et al., 2022[73]). These efforts have curbed car use, improved air quality and strengthened public support for creating car-free zones to promote walking and cycling. Extending similar measures to other cities could further reduce car dependency nationwide.
National policies that foster car dependency need to be reformed. Several fiscal policies continue to encourage car use. Slovenia’s tax-free commuting allowance covers 10% of petrol costs per kilometre and can account for up to one-third of the transport-related effective carbon rate (OECD, 2024[1]). Past attempts to reform this allowance have failed amid strong resistance, particularly from trade unions. Free workplace parking remains widespread and untaxed. Transport-oriented development in spatial planning is limited, and most municipal spatial plans rarely consider public transport or mixed land-use development.
Policies that attract transit traffic need reform. Like many of its neighbouring countries, Slovenia provides partial tax refunds for commercial diesel (CNR, 2025[74]). These refunds lower the price of road freight transport, reducing the competitiveness of more sustainable modes such as rail. They also provide incentives for freight traffic between Central and South-Eastern Europe to refuel in Slovenia, increasing recorded emissions. The NECP is considering an end of excise duty reimbursements, pending approval of the revised EU Energy Taxation Directive, which is delayed as Member States have not found consensus yet.
Road pricing has strengthened for freight trucks. In accordance with EU regulation, trucks on motorways pay tolls based on the distance travelled, their Euro emissions standard, number of axles and – since November 2025 – CO2 emissions. This pricing is implemented through a revenue-neutral differentiation of the infrastructure charge according to the vehicle’s CO2 emission class. Slovenia did not opt to price CO2 emissions from trucks using the external cost charge in addition to the infrastructure charge – as done in Austria and Germany. However, Slovenia will apply an external cost charge on air pollution – as mandated by EU regulation – and opted to apply a charge on noise pollution from March 2026. Revenues from the external cost charge are earmarked to improve the transport system, reduce the environmental impact of transport and develop transport infrastructure. In line with EU guidance, the external cost charge will be higher in areas with higher air pollution and noise exposure.
Congestion charges and road pricing can be further strengthened. Differentiating rates by time, in addition to place, would help address congestion (van Dender, 2019[75]). Slovenia should consider extending distance-based charging to light vehicles, which pay a flat rate. This would help offset the loss of revenue from fuel taxes as electric vehicles (EVs) become more widespread. Such an approach is especially critical for Slovenia as tax revenues from road fuels accounted for around 10% of central government tax revenue in 2023. The NECP envisages introducing congestion charges in Ljubljana and Maribor by 2030, but the responsibility for doing so lies with the respective city authorities.
Despite some progress, public transport remains underdeveloped. The country has long prioritised roads but has recently increased investments in rail significantly (Chapter 1). Slovenia’s RRP allocates nearly EUR 400 million, more than 17% of the total envelope to support sustainable mobility (MF, 2025[40]). Despite these improvements, public transport had a relatively low market share of 15% in 2023, below the EU average of 17% in 2023. Although dispersed settlement patterns pose challenges, rail potential is further limited by service frequency, limited integration with bus networks, and the lack of seamless passenger information systems. Making better use of existing infrastructure will require improved service integration, unified ticketing, and enhanced frequency, convenience and reliability. Investing in supporting infrastructure for multimodal transport would help unlock the full potential of the rail network. Moreover, the country’s National Integrated Transport Strategy from 2015 is outdated. A new comprehensive transport strategy is under development, planned for adoption in 2027.
Greater adoption of cleaner vehicles is needed
Motor vehicle taxes can be strengthened and better aligned to encourage cleaner cars. Revenues from motor vehicle taxes (excluding fuel duty) are low (0.3% of GDP vs. 0.4% in the EU). Since 2021, the registration tax has been based on the vehicle’s CO2 emissions and Euro engine standards. However, tax rates have been too low to encourage a shift towards hybrid and EVs, leaving their share in the car fleet low. More importantly, preferential rates for older used cars have led to increased registrations of used combustion-engine vehicles. Also, the annual vehicle tax does not reflect emissions. Removing favourable registration tax treatment for older vehicles and introducing environmental criteria in the annual vehicle tax would help rejuvenate the fleet and steer the market towards cleaner vehicles.
Incentives for EVs and charging infrastructure need to be refocussed. In 2024, Slovenia’s EV sales and charging infrastructure were well below the EU average (EAFO, 2025[76]). Limited incentives, high costs and inadequate charging infrastructure have hindered growth of EV adoption. Slovenia subsidises both the purchase of EVs and the expansion of the charging infrastructure. Yet, EV subsidies were not targeted based on socio-economic household characteristics such as transport poverty risk.
The built environment holds key levers for climate resilience
Floods and more frequent heatwaves are increasingly affecting both Slovenian communities and the built environment. Cities have shown leadership in green urban development, leveraging EU LIFE projects and Cohesion Funds. Since 2010, over 40 000 trees have been planted and 120 ha of greenspace added to Ljubljana. Nature-based solutions, such as urban forests, rain gardens and sustainable drainage systems, help mitigate flooding and reduce the urban heat island effect, while delivering co-benefits for health, mobility and tourism (OECD, 2021[77]).
Resilience in the built environment begins with adaptive site selection through spatial planning (see above). Slovenia could strengthen resilience with regulatory reforms. The Building Act (GZ-1) sets high-level standards for construction of buildings such as rules on earthquake risk assessment but does not integrate climate risks. Likewise, technical requirements issued by the Ministry of Natural Resources and Spatial Planning could better integrate climate change considerations.
Despite progress, building emissions need to be reduced further
Buildings accounted for 32% of final energy consumption in 2023 and are the main source of PM2.5 emissions, largely due to biomass burning in rural areas. Slovenia’s topography traps pollutants near the ground in valleys, especially in winter. Between 2005 and 2023, building-related PM2.5 emissions fell by 45%, while direct GHG emissions dropped by nearly 60%, driven by the elimination of coal subsidies and a transition to cleaner wood pellets. EU regulation requires the country to reduce overall PM2.5 emissions by 60% by 2030 compared to 2005. Slovenia also aims to further reduce GHG emissions to 70% of 2005 levels by 2030. The Long-term Energy Renovation Strategy (DSEPS 2050) envisions a fully decarbonised building stock by 2050.
Pricing signals are not fully aligned with the goal of reducing emissions from buildings (Chapter 1). The phase-out of regulated gas prices for heating put in place during the energy crisis is a positive step. However, reduced excise duties for heating fuels persist, reducing incentives for energy efficiency and renewable heating solutions (OECD, 2024[1]).
Scaling up and targeting support for energy renovation is needed. Slovenia has a relatively old and energy-inefficient housing stock, mostly privately owned. DSEPS 2050 targets 74% of single-dwelling buildings and 91% of multi-apartment buildings to be renovated by 2050, with finance needs to 2030 of EUR 8.5 billion (13% of 2024 GDP). However, the renovation rate was only 1.2% in 2023, far below the 3% target (IID, 2024[78]). Slovenia initiated renovations through grants for energy efficiency upgrades but now requires a stronger mobilisation of private funds. The government recently introduced low or zero-interest loans and loan de-risking instruments and is piloting innovative financing instruments such as on-bill financing. Only 28% of the building stock has an energy performance certificate (EPC). Integrating resilience measures, such as material choices and structural reinforcements, into energy renovation would capture synergies, reduce costs and streamline implementation (EC, 2023[79]).
Fragmented ownership and workforce shortages hinder progress in renovation. Multi-owner buildings (27% of residential floor area) face challenges as the consent threshold in multi-owner buildings can effectively prevent or delay renovations (OECD, 2024[1]). However, the Building Construction Act recently lowered the decision threshold to simple majority. Slovenia also faces a shortage of skilled construction workers, with high turnover and a reliance on foreign workers. The BUILD UP Skills initiative established the National Qualification Platform and created a roadmap to address skill gaps. More action is required, especially in rural areas where construction workers frequently lack skills to deliver energy efficiency upgrades.
District heating powered by renewables can significantly decarbonise buildings in densely populated areas. Networks could be expanded and systems modernised to reduce thermal losses. In 2024, about 6 000 buildings mainly in Ljubljana and Maribor were connected, accounting for roughly 10% of national heating demand. Current feedstocks are dominated by natural gas (50%), coal (30%) and biomass (15%), with other renewables such as geothermal and waste heat contributing less than 5%. Slovenia targets a 27% share of renewables in district heating by 2030. Targeted support for municipalities is needed, especially to develop low-carbon heating and cooling plans.
Wood combustion accounts for roughly one-third of residential energy consumption and is a key driver of PM2.5 emissions, largely due to outdated burners and incorrect uses such as burning damp wood. A proposed ban on the installation of biomass boilers in new homes was not adopted. However, subsidies for replacing old boilers with modern wood pellet burners are in place. While modern burners release fewer particulates than older models, they still pollute more than heat pumps. In addition, while wood pellets are primarily sourced from residues, they have notable lifecycle GHG emissions linked to transport and processing (Laschi, Marchi and González-García, 2016[80]). Stronger regulatory measures to discourage improper burning may be warranted.
Agriculture is particularly vulnerable to climate risks
The agriculture sector faces growing climate risks, primarily from more frequent and severe droughts, compounded by extreme weather events and pests. In 2022, a severe drought caused over EUR 148 million in damage – over 30% of annual agricultural output – requiring the use of state aid. The agriculture sector has an adaptation strategy and an action plan, but implementation has been fragmented, and resilience measures have not been mainstreamed. It is encouraging that Slovenia began producing annual climate reports for the agricultural sector in 2023, concretely outlining mitigation and adaptation efforts. To support farmers across various areas, including climate risk management, the Chamber of Agriculture and Forestry has 60 local units that provide advisory services (CAFS, 2025[81]).
Despite some progress, the sector remains largely reactive. The completion of the climate risk and vulnerability assessment mandated under the Climate Act is a welcome step, although it will be crucial to follow up with resilience measures. The sector could draw insights from the 2016‑2021 LIFE ViVaCCAdapt project in the Vipava Valley. The project demonstrated several resilient practices, including efficient irrigation systems that significantly reduced water and energy use; nature-based solutions; and data-driven planning (Climate-ADAPT, 2023[82]). Scaling these approaches will require capacity building.
With about 70 000 farms with an average size below 7 ha, Slovenia’s small family farms have limited investment capacity and financial constraints, which is a key barrier to resilience (EC, 2025[42]). Beyond historical and geographic factors, barriers such as high transaction costs, subsidised land rents and policies favouring small-scale farmers hinder consolidation (OECD, 2024[1]). Co‑operative models could also improve access to funding and lower administrative burden.
Slovenia is reforming its agricultural compensation framework to promote adaptation. The 2023 amendment to the Natural Disaster Consequences Act includes measures such as differentiated compensation rates based on insurance coverage; support caps tied to percentage of lost income; reduced scope for repeat claims if the same hazard affects the same crop multiple times; and payouts conditional on prior connection to irrigation systems for plots in irrigated areas (Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia, 2023[83]). These are positive steps, but as droughts intensify, further efforts are needed to shift from reactive state aid to proactive resilience and insurance (OECD, 2025[84]). Recognising non-irrigation investments in resilience – such as crop diversification and drought-tolerant varieties – under the conditionality framework could strengthen incentives (OECD, 2025[85]).
Although the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Food subsidises up to 60% of insurance premiums for hail, floods, storms and fire, uptake remains low, suggesting behavioural barriers and reliance on state bailouts. Droughts, despite being the most damaging hazard, are excluded from insurance subsidies. Losses are instead addressed through ad hoc legislation and post-disaster compensation handled by the Administration for Civil Protection and Disaster Relief under the Ministry of Defence.
Slovenia is not on track to meet emissions targets in agriculture
The agriculture sector is a key contributor to air pollution and GHG emissions. Agriculture accounts for nearly all NH3 emissions in Slovenia and 11% of GHG emissions – just below the EU-27 average (12%). As other sectors decarbonise, agriculture’s share on total GHG emissions is expected to rise. EU regulation requires Slovenia to reduce NH3 emissions by 15% by 2030 compared to 2005, but the country is expected to fall short of this target (MECE, 2025[58]).16 Slovenia also aims to reduce GHG emissions by 2.8% by 2030 compared to 2005. While this target is more ambitious than projections with existing measures, it lags targets set by several other countries, including Denmark, Germany and Slovakia.
Environmentally harmful subsidies are still widespread and need to be phased out (Chapter 1). As in most EU countries, Slovenia applies a reduced diesel tax rate for farmers and applies a reduced value-added tax rate for pesticides and fertilisers. The preferential value-added tax will be phased out by 2031 in line with EU legislation. These subsidies promote excessive input use, resulting in soil degradation, water pollution, biodiversity loss, and increased NH₃, N₂O and CO2 emissions.
Although financial support for emissions reduction has increased, funding could be further increased. Most funding comes from the EU CAP. Slovenia allocates almost EUR 800 million (43% of its CAP budget) to environmental and climate objectives, which is below the EU average (49%) and neighbouring countries such as Austria (54%) (EC, 2025[18]), indicating potential for further increases.
Despite commendable efforts, demand-side measures can be strengthened. Sustainable diets and reduced food waste lower GHG and NH3 emissions, are cost effective, and help achieve health, water and biodiversity targets (IPCC, 2023[86]). In 2023, Slovenia recorded one of the lowest total food waste levels in the EU. Yet, food waste in retail, restaurants and other food services, which generate nearly half of Slovenia’s food waste, still exceed the EU-27 average. The carbon footprint of the average Slovenian diet is lower than that of other European countries, although the footprint of Slovenian men remains relatively high (Alves et al., 2024[87]). Introducing mandatory vegetarian days in public and school canteens – leveraging the free school lunch programme starting in 2027 – could encourage more sustainable choices.
Boosting forest resilience is key to restore Slovenia’s carbon sink
Slovenia’s LULUCF sector is an important carbon sink but is vulnerable to increasing temperatures, changes in precipitation and decreasing soil moisture driven by climate change. Together, these weaken forest resilience to storms and pests. Protecting natural buffers against climate impacts and biodiversity loss requires urgent action to enhance forest resilience (OECD, 2023[88]). The integration of climate resilience into the National Forest Programme and Operational Programme (2022‑2026) and the forest management plans, functional mapping and close-to-nature practices of the Slovenia Forest Service (SFS) provide a solid foundation.
Slovenia’s forest structure is highly fragmented, with implications for resilience. Over 75% of forest land is privately owned by about 400 000 individuals. This predominance of small-scale parcels can be beneficial for biodiversity but reduces incentives for active management and complicates co‑ordination due to limited expertise and resources. Uptake of free services and incentives by the SFS remain low. Professional management associations, where owners can delegate operational management after a single sign-up, can reduce administrative barriers and increase adoption of resilience and biodiversity measures. In addition, legal frameworks governing jointly owned forests often require high consent thresholds for management decisions, which can hinder adaptation and should be revised.
Harvested wood products (HWPs) – timber-based products that continue to store carbon – could be strengthened further. The country is obliged to increase its LULUCF carbon sink by 0.21 Mt CO₂e compared to the 2016-2018 average by 2030 and is expected to achieve this target both with and without additional measures. The carbon sink is projected to increase to around 2.5 Mt CO₂e by 2050, significantly lower than the sink levels observed in the 2000s. With limited afforestation potential due to high forest cover, efforts concentrate on preventing deforestation, boosting ecosystem resilience and increasing HWPs for better carbon storage (GoRS, 2024[46]). HWPs currently account for 5-10% of the LULUCF carbon sink in Slovenia, but this share is expected to rise above 60% after 2030 (GoRS, 2024[46]). The NECP aims to increase harvesting and the production of processed roundwood for non-energy use from 2 million m3 to 3 million m3 per year. Annual harvesting levels below 6 million m3 are expected to be in line with stabilising the CO2 absorption under EU regulations (Jevšenak, Klopčič and Mali, 2020[89]), indicating there is room to expand timber production and HWPs using sustainable forestry practices.
Targets, climate governance and co-ordination
Mainstream climate adaptation across national, sectoral and local levels as required by the Climate Act, while strengthening capacity. Establish a robust monitoring and evaluation framework to track progress, as mandated by the Act.
Require sectors to prepare and implement costed measures with clear timelines following climate risk and vulnerability assessments. Support less-resourced regions in completing their AAPs and ensure strong co-ordination among regional councils and municipalities.
Update key strategies, including the NECP and the LT-LEDS, to align with the 2045 net-zero target. Set separate targets for gross emission reductions and carbon sequestration in the LULUCF sector for 2045, and consider interim milestones (e.g. 2035, 2040).
Cross-sectoral climate adaptation policy responses
Facilitate use of climate data to strengthen sectoral and regional adaptation.
Improve integration of updated flood risk data into spatial planning via the e-Spatial Planning System to automatically restrict building permits in high-risk zones.
Recalibrate adaptation finance to prioritise prevention over disaster response. Consider increasing public adaptation funding. Increase incentives for private adaptation, e.g. by conditioning compensation or subsidised insurance premiums on prior resilience efforts.
Promote resilient recovery by improving preparedness to “build back better” and integrating climate risk assessment into all infrastructure projects above a modest threshold.
Strengthen climate-hazard insurance and consider a mandatory flood insurance policy, with affordability safeguards and risk-reduction incentives.
Accelerating the shift towards a low-carbon, climate-resilient power sector
Scale up renewables to cut emissions and diversify against climate risks. Focus expansion in areas with low risk to biodiversity and start planning to expand responsibly into higher risk areas.
Implement planned grid upgrades and adopt national wind plans. Boost permitting capacity and allow developers to submit applications simultaneously instead of sequentially after approval of each administrative step.
Accelerate support for community-led energy projects to mitigate local opposition to new energy infrastructure, e.g. by streamlining administrative processes and increasing funding.
Advance the coal phase-out date from 2033 and clarify plans beyond 2027. Redirect coal subsidies to infrastructure investments to support economic opportunities in coal regions.
Carefully assess the nuclear expansion of Krško through comprehensive cost-benefit and energy scenario analysis, including the plant’s contribution to the national net-zero target.
Curbing emissions from the transport sector
Gradually reform the commuting allowance, e.g. by adjusting eligibility and tax exemption thresholds. Tax workplace parking that is currently free and phase out preferential tax treatment for diesel.
Reduce car dependency by extending distance-based charging and reallocating road space to other uses such as green infrastructure or space for pedestrians, cyclists and other micromobility options. Update the National Integrated Transport Strategy and mainstream transport-oriented development in spatial planning.
Strengthen public transport by expanding investments in sustainable transport infrastructure, such as rail, and increasing incentives for use and provision of public transport, including on-demand services.
Strengthen incentives for cleaner vehicles by ending preferential registration tax for older vehicles and introducing environmental criteria to the annual vehicle tax. Increase financial support for electric trucks and inter-city buses to accelerate fleet renewal. Strengthen support for rural charging infrastructure to ensure nationwide charging station coverage.
Towards an energy-efficient, zero-pollution and climate-resilient building sector
Continue scaling up and mainstreaming urban nature-based solutions. Structure capacity-building and knowledge transfer from leaders like Ljubljana to other municipalities.
Amend the Building Act and technical requirements for buildings to require climate risk assessment for all new constructions. Integrate resilience upgrades into energy renovations to capture synergies.
Break down barriers to energy renovation by upskilling the construction workforce. Enhance EPC coverage to target financial support towards the most energy-inefficient buildings.
Support municipalities in expanding and modernising district heating networks while shifting feedstocks towards renewables and waste heat.
Promote alternatives to wood burning like heat pumps through increased financial support; stricter enforcement against improper wood burning; and greater public awareness of air pollution impacts.
Fostering climate-smart agriculture and reducing agricultural emissions
Strengthen incentives for risk reduction. Tighten existing conditions that link disaster compensation to prior adaptation efforts and expand eligible conditions beyond irrigation.
Support farm consolidation to improve access to climate resilience funding, knowledge and infrastructure. Expand technical support to help farmers implement resilient practices.
Include drought as a subsidy-eligible peril. Improve insurance uptake by mechanisms such as automatic basic coverage with opt-out options.
Phase out environmentally harmful subsidies and channel the savings to low-income farmers to enhance acceptability.
Consider allocating more funds to climate objectives through the Common Agricultural Policy funding.
Further strengthen demand-side measures to adopt more sustainable diets and cut food waste.
Increasing resilience and carbon sinks in the forestry and land-use sector
Increase production of processed roundwood for non-energy uses to strengthen carbon storage in harvested wood products while protecting biodiversity.
Accelerate programmes to enhance co-ordination across small-scale private forest owners to mainstream sustainable forest management and strengthen resilience and carbon sinks.
Update legal frameworks to overcome fragmented ownership constraints on climate resilience.
References
[87] Alves, R. et al. (2024), “Environmental impact of dietary patterns in 10 European countries; a cross-sectional analysis of nationally representative dietary surveys”, European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 34/5, pp. 992-1000, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckae088.
[24] ARSO (2025), Consumption of Plant Protection Products, ARSO Environmental Network.
[22] ARSO (2025), Dryness Meter Slovenia, ARSO Environmental Network.
[25] ARSO (2025), Nitrates in Groundwater, ARSO Environmental Network.
[7] ARSO (2020), Nature and biodiversity, (indicator), https://kazalci.arso.gov.si/index.php/en/teme/narava-biotska-pestrost (accessed on 20 May 2025).
[34] Berger, N. et al. (2023), “How the new Environmental Protection Act would transform EPR schemes in Slovenia”, https://www.europeandatajournalism.eu/cp_data_news/how-the-new-environmental-protection-act-would-transform-epr-schemes-in-slovenia/ (accessed on 15 May 2025).
[6] Bolješić, R. (2019), Convention on Biological Diversity – Sixth National Report of the Republic of Slovenia, Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning, Ljubljana, https://www.cbd.int/doc/nr/nr-06/si-nr-06-en.pdf.
[81] CAFS (2025), “About CAFS”, https://www.kgzs.si/cafs (accessed on 9 July 2025).
[9] CBD (2020), “National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAP)”, https://ort.cbd.int/nbsaps/my-country/98D7993A-6CFB-D971-0224-9127D9D6F1ED/view#0.8/0/0 (accessed on 20 May 2025).
[59] Climate Council (2025), “Ending fossil fuel subsidies, setting intermediate targets and an aviation climate levy”, https://www.gov.si/novice/2025-07-14-ukinitev-subvencij-za-fosilna-goriva-dolocitev-vmesnih-ciljev-in-letalska-podnebna-dajatev/ (accessed on 10 October 2025).
[56] Climate Council (2025), Minutes of the 16th Session of the Climate Council, Climate Council, Slovenia, https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MOPE/Podnebje/Podnebni-svet-/Zapisnik-o-16.-seji-Podnebnega-sveta-z-dne-2.-7.-2025.pdf.
[82] Climate-ADAPT (2023), “Adapting to climate change by improving irrigation practice in Vipava Valley, Slovenia”, https://climate-adapt.eea.europa.eu/en/metadata/case-studies/adapting-to-climate-change-by-improving-irrigation-practice-in-vipava-valley-slovenia (accessed on 10 October 2025).
[74] CNR (2025), “Excise duties and mechanisms for RFT partial refunds on excise duties on diesel in Europe”, https://www.cnr.fr/en/excise-duties-and-mechanisms-rft-partial-refunds-diesel-europe-march-2025 (accessed on 6 January 2026).
[44] CoA (2025), Managing the Recovery and Resilience Plan implementation, Court of Audit, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubjana, https://www.rs-rs.si/en/audits-auditing/audit-archive/audit/managing-the-recovery-and-resilience-plan-implementation/.
[28] CoA (2022), Efficiency of the System of Environmental Charges for Water Use, Court of Audit, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana.
[76] EAFO (2025), Recharging Infrastructure & Vehicles and Fleet, European Alternative Fuels Observatory, Brussels.
[71] EBRD (2019), “Sostanj thermal power plant”, https://www.ebrd.com/home/work-with-us/projects/psd/40417.html (accessed on 10 October 2025).
[41] EC (2026), Cohesion Open Data Platform, (dataset), https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/ (accessed on 24 February 2026).
[43] EC (2026), Recovery and Resilience Scoreboard, (dataset), https://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/recovery-and-resilience-scoreboard/index.html?lang=en (accessed on 27 January 2026).
[42] EC (2025), At a Glance: Slovenia’s CAP Strategic Plan, European Commission, Brussels, https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/e6089192-4d33-49ef-af25-b14a34bf2b46_en?filename=csp-at-a-glance-slovenia_en.pdf.
[18] EC (2025), Financial allocation to CAP specific objectives, (indicator), https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/DashboardCapPlan/financial_allocation.html# (accessed on 10 October 2025).
[5] EC (2025), Sustainable Development in the European Union – Monitoring Report on Progress towards the SDGs in an EU Context – 2025 Edition, European Commission, Brussels.
[61] EC (2025), Third River Basin Management Plans Second Flood Hazard and Risk Maps and Second Flood Risk Management Plans Member State: Slovenia, European Commission, Brussels, https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVIII/EU/11278/imfname_11452071.pdf#:~:text=objectives%20and%20measures%3B%20x%20The,structural%20measures%2C%20beyond%20generic%20measures.
[14] EC (2024), “March infringements package: Key decisions”, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/inf_24_663 (accessed on 19 May 2025).
[79] EC (2023), EU-level Technical Guidance on Adapting Buildings to Climate Change, European Commission, Brussels, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2834/558395.
[30] EC (2021), Economic Data related to the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive and the Floods Directive and the Financing of Measures, European Commission, Brussels.
[65] EEA (2025), Economic losses from weather- and climate-related extremes in Europe, (indicator), https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/economic-losses-from-climate-related (accessed on 16 September 2025).
[32] EEA (2025), Waste Management Country Profile – Slovenia, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/topics/in-depth/waste-and-recycling/municipal-and-packaging-waste-management-country-profiles-2025/si-municipal-waste-factsheet.pdf.
[26] EEA (2024), Pesticides in rivers, lakes and groundwater in Europe, (indicator), https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/pesticides-in-rivers-lakes-and (accessed on 16 September 2025).
[64] EIB (2024), “94% of Europeans support measures to adapt to climate change, according to EIB survey”, https://www.eib.org/en/press/all/2024-406-94-of-europeans-support-measures-to-adapt-to-climate-change-according-to-eib-survey (accessed on 31 October 2025).
[39] ETC CE (2024), Circular Economy Country Profile 2024 – Slovenia, European Topic Centre on Circular Economy and Resource Use, https://www.eionet.europa.eu/etcs/etc-ce/siovenia_2024-ce-country-profile_final.pdf.
[52] Fiscal Council (2022), Assessment of the Fiscal Consequences of the Coalition Agreement “The 15th Government of the Republic of Slovenia: The Work Programme of the 2022-2026 Coalition”, Fiscal Council, Slovenia, https://www.fs-rs.si/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Assessment_Coalition-Agreement_2022.pdf.
[51] Gabrovec, M. et al. (2024), Transport Poverty in the Republic of Slovenia, Report of the Targeted Research Project V6-2251, Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy, Ministry of Natural Resources and Spatial Planning, Public Agency for Scientific Research and Innovation of the Republic of Slovenia, https://giam.zrc-sazu.si/en/programi-in-projekti/mobility-poverty-in-the-republic-of-slovenia.
[69] Germeshausen, R., S. Heim and U. Wagner (2025), “Support for renewable energy: The case of wind power”, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 250, p. 105468, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2025.105468.
[62] GoRS (2025), “State relief measures after the floods of August 2023”, https://www.gov.si/zbirke/projekti-in-programi/ukrepi-drzave-za-pomoc-po-poplavah-avgusta-2023/ (accessed on 30 September 2025).
[60] GoRS (2025), “Strengthening climate governance and accelerating implementation of measures is essential to achieve climate goals”, https://www.gov.si/novice/2025-10-13-krepitev-podnebnega-upravljanja-in-pospesitev-izvajanja-ukrepov-nujna-za-doseganje-podnebnih-ciljev/ (accessed on 15 October 2025).
[46] GoRS (2024), Updated National Energy and Climate Plan of the Republic of Slovenia, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubjana, https://commission.europa.eu/publications/slovenia-final-updated-necp-2021-2030-submitted-2025_en.
[49] GoRS (2023), Three-years Action Plan for Reducing Energy Poverty, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubjana, https://www.energetika-portal.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/podrocja/energetika/energetska_revscina/an_enrev_nov2023.pdf.
[23] GoRS (2023), Water Management Measures Program, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana.
[11] GoRS (2020), National Environmental Action Programme 2020–2030, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubjana, https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MNVP/Dokumenti/ReNPVO2020_2030_ang.doc.
[3] GoRS (2017), Slovenian Development Strategy 2030, Government of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubjana, https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MKRR/Strategija-razvoja-Slovenije-2030/Slovenian-Development-Strategy-2030.pdf.
[12] Hribar, M. and D. Ribeiro (2024), “SELINA, Country Fact Sheet: Slovenia”, https://project-selina.eu/storage/app/uploads/public/681/c67/ec1/681c67ec1c11e429224270.pdf.
[78] IID (2024), “Highlights from the “green transition in construction” conference”, https://build-up.ec.europa.eu/en/news-and-events/news/highlights-green-transition-construction-conference (accessed on 14 October 2025).
[4] IMAD (2025), Development Report 2025, Institute of Macroeconomic Analysis and Development, Ljubljana, https://www.umar.gov.si/fileadmin/user_upload/razvoj_slovenije/2025/slovenski/POR2025_01.pdf.
[86] IPCC (2023), Climate Change 2022 – Mitigation of Climate Change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157926.
[89] Jevšenak, J., M. Klopčič and B. Mali (2020), “The effect of harvesting on national forest carbon sinks up to 2050 simulated by the CBM-CFS3 model: A case study from Slovenia”, Forests, Vol. 11/10, p. 1090, https://doi.org/10.3390/f11101090.
[70] Kirkegaard, J. et al. (2023), “Towards failed renewable energy communities? Activist attempts to change market conditions in the Danish wind energy market”, Energy Research & Social Science, Vol. 102, p. 103152, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103152.
[20] Larsen, J. et al. (2022), Closer-to-Nature Forest Management, European Forest Institute, Barcelona, https://doi.org/10.36333/fs12.
[80] Laschi, A., E. Marchi and S. González-García (2016), “Environmental performance of wood pellets’ production through life cycle analysis”, Energy, Vol. 103, pp. 469-480, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2016.02.165.
[37] Laubinger, F. et al. (2022), “Deposit-refund systems and the interplay with additional mandatory extended producer responsibility policies”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 208, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a80f4b26-en.
[16] Machado, R. et al. (2025), “The recent spatiotemporal dynamics of grasslands in Slovenia: Contribution to their preservation and management”, Rangeland Ecology & Management, Vol. 98, pp. 204-213, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2024.07.010.
[58] MECE (2025), Informative Inventory Report: Slovenia 2025, Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy, Ljubljana, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/SVN%20NID%202025%20April.pdf.
[40] MF (2025), Fourth Amendment to the Recovery and Resilience Plan, Summary, Ministry of Finance, Ljubjana, https://www.gov.si/assets/organi-v-sestavi/URSOO/Dokumenti/Nacrt-za-okrevanje-in-odpornost/Povzetek_cetrte_spremembe_NOO_12_december_2025_final.pdf.
[53] MF (2018), Green Budget Reform in Slovenia, Ministry of Finance, Ljubljana, https://www.gov.si/assets/Uploads/eb81ce3474/Zelena-proracunska-reforma-Okoljski-in-javnofinancni-vidik-spodbud-v-Sloveniji.pdf.
[10] MNVP (2025), “The Ministry of Natural Resources and Spatial Planning is preparing a national plan for nature restoration”, https://www.gov.si/novice/2025-03-28-ministrstvo-za-naravne-vire-in-prostor-pripravlja-nacionalni-nacrt-za-obnovo-narave/ (accessed on 15 May 2025).
[63] MNVP (2025), “Two years after the floods: Strengthening resilience to climate change”, https://www.gov.si/en/news/2025-07-25-two-years-after-the-floods-strengthening-resilience-to-climate-change/ (accessed on 15 October 2025).
[21] MOP (2020), Analysis of the Objectives and Measures of the Programme for the Management of Natura 2000 sites, Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning, Slovenia, https://natura2000.gov.si/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumenti/LIFE_IP_NATURA_SI/Rezultati/A.3_Analiza_PUN2000_2015-20_Sektor_gozdarstvo.pdf.
[47] MOPE (2025), “Slovenia issues its first 10-year bond linked to the fulfilment of sustainability objectives under the NECP”, https://www.energetika-portal.si/nc/novica/n/slovenija-izdala-prvo-10-letno-obveznico-vezano-na-izpolnjevanje-trajnostnih-ciljev-iz-nepn/ (accessed on 31 October 2025).
[50] MOPE (2025), Summary of the Second Comprehensive NECP Reporting (March 2025), Ministry of the Environment, Climate and Energy, Ljubjana, https://www.energetika-portal.si/fileadmin/dokumenti/publikacije/nepn/izvajanje/nepn_porek_jul2025.pdf.
[66] Nachtigall, D. et al. (2022), “The climate actions and policies measurement framework: A structured and harmonised climate policy database to monitor countries’ mitigation action”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 203, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2caa60ce-en.
[36] National Assembly (2025), “2311-IX Act on the deposit system for beverage packaging”, https://www.dz-rs.si/wps/portal/Home/zakonodaja/izbran?uid=035D11C1EE20D5BCC1258CD2002C82E2&db=pre_zak&mandat=IX (accessed on 13 September 2025).
[90] OECD (2026), Building More Competitive Regions in Slovenia, OECD Multi-level Governance Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7dd44220-en.
[54] OECD (2026), Carbon Pricing and Energy Taxation, (dataset), https://www.oecd.org/content/oecd/en/data/datasets/carbon-pricing-and-energy-taxation-database.html (accessed on 17 February 2026).
[38] OECD (2026), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Austria 2026, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/520533a1-en.
[29] OECD (2026), Policy Instruments for the Environment (PINE), (dataset), https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/policy-instruments-for-the-environment-pine-database.html (accessed on 17 October 2025).
[55] OECD (2025), “A review of Slovenia’s industrial strategy: Policies for a green, innovative, and smart economy”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 177, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f10e4ef9-en.
[68] OECD (2025), Climate Actions and Policies Measurement Framework, (dataset), https://oe.cd/dx/capmf (accessed on 1 September 2025).
[84] OECD (2025), Global Drought Outlook: Trends, Impacts and Policies to Adapt to a Drier World, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d492583a-en.
[45] OECD (2025), Maximising the Benefits of Effective Competition in Public Procurement in Slovenia, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c1e5d31f-en.
[85] OECD (2025), Measuring progress in adapting the agricultural sector to more variable and extreme weather conditions: Framework, indicator methodology and results, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/388e1d3c-en.
[2] OECD (2025), OECD Economic Outlook, Volume 2025 Issue 2: Resilient Growth but with Increasing Fragilities, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9f653ca1-en.
[31] OECD (2025), Waste – Municipal Waste: Generation and Treatment, (dataset), https://doi.org/10.1787/data-00601-en (accessed on 18 December 2025).
[72] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Hungary 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/795451e5-en.
[1] OECD (2024), OECD Economic Surveys: Slovenia 2024, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bc4a107b-en.
[13] OECD (2024), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Slovak Republic 2024, OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/108238e8-en.
[67] OECD (2024), Pricing Greenhouse Gas Emissions 2024: Gearing Up to Bring Emissions Down, OECD Series on Carbon Pricing and Energy Taxation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b44c74e6-en.
[27] OECD (2023), Implementing Water Economics in the EU Water Framework Directive, OECD Studies on Water, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d6abda81-en.
[88] OECD (2023), Taming Wildfires in the Context of Climate Change, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/dd00c367-en.
[77] OECD (2021), “Strengthening adaptation-mitigation linkages for a low-carbon, climate-resilient future”, OECD Environment Policy Papers, No. 23, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6d79ff6a-en.
[33] OECD (2012), OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Slovenia 2012, OECD Environmental Performance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264169265-en.
[83] Official Gazette of the Republic of Slovenia (2023), “Act to amend the Natural Disaster Consequences Act (ZOPNN-F)”, https://www.uradni-list.si/glasilo-uradni-list-rs/vsebina/2023-01-2599# (accessed on 10 October 2025).
[19] SFS (2025), 2024 Forest Report, Slovenia Forest Service, Ljubljana, https://www.zgs.si/assets/uploads/files/vsebine/1/7/4/porgozd-2024-20250314-mkgp-mnvp.pdf.
[17] Šumrada, T. et al. (2022), “Farmers’ preferences for result-based schemes for grassland conservation in Slovenia”, Journal for Nature Conservation, Vol. 66, p. 126143, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126143.
[15] Šumrada, T., P. Kmecl and E. Erjavec (2021), “Do the EU’s common agricultural policy funds negatively affect the diversity of farmland birds? Evidence from Slovenia”, Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, Vol. 306, p. 107200, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2020.107200.
[48] SURS (2025), “Energy poverty, 2024”, https://www.stat.si/StatWeb/en/news/Index/13487 (accessed on 11 August 2025).
[8] UNEP/MAP-SPA/RAC (2021), Slovenia Conservation of Mediterranean Marine and Coastal Biodiversity by 2030 and Beyond, United Nations Environment Programme / Mediterranean Action Plan – Specially Protected Areas Regional Activity Centre, Tunis, https://spa-rac.org/en/publication/download/1543/slovenia-conservation-of-mediterranean-marine-and-coastal-biodiversity-by-2030-and-beyond.
[57] UNFCCC (2024), Final Compilation and Accounting Report for Slovenia for the Second Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Bonn.
[75] van Dender, K. (2019), “Taxing vehicles, fuels, and road use: Opportunities for improving transport tax practice”, OECD Taxation Working Papers, No. 44, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e7f1d771-en.
[73] Virdo, J. et al. (2022), Pan-European City Rating and Ranking on Urban Mobility for Liveable Cities, Ricardo, https://cleancitiescampaign.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Technical-report-Clean-Cities-City-Rating-and-Ranking.pdf.
[35] Wilcox, J. and J. Mackenzie (2021), What we waste, Reloop, Brussels, https://www.reloopplatform.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/What-We-Waste-Reloop-Report-April-2021-1.pdf.
Source: OECD Secretariat based on country submission.
← 1. A multidimensional measurement framework used by the Institute of Macroeconomic Analysis and Development of the Republic of Slovenia to monitor implementation of the country’s Development Strategy.
← 2. The Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) protects habitats and species of Community interest, i.e. which are threatened to disappear in the EU, have a small natural range or present outstanding examples of typical characteristics of Europe’s biogeographical regions.
← 3. Gradual transformation of grasslands into forests.
← 4. Nature-based forest management (NBFM) considers forests as complex ecosystems, advocates management based on natural processes and attempts to integrate many forest functions at small spatial scales. It also applies variable management approaches, most commonly low-impact harvesting, which means minimising negative impacts on regeneration, the remaining stand and the whole forest ecosystem. Special emphasis is placed on maintaining the integrity of forest microclimate and soil; thus clear-cutting, intensive soil preparation and use of fertilisers and herbicides are generally avoided. NBFM is synonymous with continuous cover management in Atlantic Europe, close-to-nature management in Central Europe, and forest ecosystem management in the United States. The proportion of forests where NBFM is practised ranges from a few percent in Portugal, Finland and Sweden to almost 100% in Switzerland, Slovenia and some German states where this approach is required by forest law.
← 5. Ratio of fellings to gross increment.
← 6. The Water Management Measures Programme is subject to review and supplementation every six years, as mandated by Article 57 of the Slovenian Water Act.
← 7. In July 2024, the European Commission launched an infringement procedure against Slovenia for violating Article 11 of the Water Framework Directive because it has not introduced periodical reviews of water permits and concessions.
← 8. The deadline for disbursements under the Recovery and Resilience Facility is set for the end of 2026.
← 9. European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund, European Social Fund Plus and Just Transition Fund.
← 10. Totalling EUR 1.6 billion in EU grants and EUR 0.5 billion in loans.
← 11. European Regional Development Fund and Cohesion Fund investment in climate change mitigation and adaptation, environment and sustainable urban mobility.
← 12. The bond links its final coupon to Slovenia’s 2030 climate target under the National Energy and Climate Plan, which aims to cut GHG emissions by 35‑45% by 2030. If Slovenia fails to meet the minimum 35% reduction, the interest rate will rise by 50 basis points; if it achieves the 45% target, the rate will drop by 50 basis points.
← 13. Households at-risk-of-poverty that are also financially unable to keep home adequately warm, or to pay utility bills and/or live in inadequate housing conditions.
← 14. Living below the at-risk-of-poverty threshold and lacking access to an adequate public transport service.
← 15. Effective carbon rates summarise how countries price GHG emissions through fuel excise taxes, carbon taxes and emissions trading systems without considering free allocations of allowances in the EU ETS.
← 16. However, methodological changes included in more recent projections, which have not yet been published, indicate that Slovenia will achieve the 2030 target.