Strengthening National Governance Systems. Exploring Current Practices and Innovations for Reporting on Policies and Measures and Greenhouse Gas Projections.

This report explores the state of the national governance systems for reporting on integrated policies and measures (PaMs) and anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emission projections in European countries, including EU Member States, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland. The so-called national systems, comprise institutional, legal, and procedural arrangements established within each country to ensure compliance with reporting obligations under the Governance Regulation (EU) 2018/1999. By understanding the current state of play of these national systems, the study aims to highlight established procedures and arrangements while identifying key areas that remain less mature. It also aims to emphasise good practices adopted by various countries, offering examples that can be adapted to other countries to enhance their governance structures. In turn, this study aims to support EU Member States and the neighbouring countries in building governance systems that go beyond compliance with reporting rules to ensure progress toward common sustainability and climate neutral targets. The study is guided by the following main questions:

• What is the current state of play of national systems in the frame of reporting on integrated PaMs and GHG emission projections? What key challenges do countries face in this reporting process? 
• What good practices have countries adopted to address these challenges? 
• How can innovation and digitalisation be leveraged to enhance monitoring, evaluation, and reporting processes while overcoming these challenges?

The study also summarises the role and structure of the European Union system for reporting on PaMs and GHG emissions projections (the ‘Union system’), as outlined in Article 39 of the Governance Regulation. The Union system, established under the Governance Regulation, provides an overarching framework that clarifies roles and responsibilities within the EU, ensuring alignment and coherence between national, European, and global climate governance efforts. Managed by the European Commission, with support from the European Environment Agency (EEA), the system ensures the collection, quality control, and dissemination of data on PaMs and GHG projections. Quality of reporting is ensured through a combination of automated quality checks and manual reviews. Reportnet 3, the primary online platform, facilitates streamlined data submission and validation. Quality-checked data is publicly disseminated and used for EU-level reporting, including the Climate Action Progress Report and the State of the Energy Union. By standardising reporting requirements and supporting Member States with technical tools, the Union system fosters coherence and alignment within the EU’s climate governance framework.

In order to assess the national systems’ state of play, this study uses the national system reports submitted under the Governance Regulation as the primary data source. These are complemented by surveys and interviews conducted with national lead reporters and governance experts. A comprehensive data collection framework was developed to identify the characteristics and arrangements established in national systems, which are categorised in five core elements: institutional and procedural robustness, legal formality, alignment with other frameworks, accountability and transparency, and public participation. The extent of arrangements and procedures established in each country are presented by the heatmap in Table S-1. The assessment of the national systems’ state of play identifies the following key findings

1. Robust and well-defined national (and Union) systems with clear legal frameworks, formalised roles, and integrated responsibilities enhance the quality of reporting, streamline processes, reduce overlaps and burdens, and align national policies with broader climate goals while promoting inclusive stakeholder engagement.
2. Most countries demonstrate well-established institutional arrangements, with defined institutional responsibilities and involvement of a diverse range of policy areas and experts in the reporting process. Data collection procedures are also robust in many countries.
3. Various countries face capacity constraints which hinder the maintenance of robust reporting mechanisms. Resource constraints are observed to limit countries' ability to meet quality requirements.
4. Strengthening networks of sectoral experts is crucial for improving stakeholder input, policy integration, and coordination across ministries. Despite existing arrangements for inter-ministerial collaboration, many countries lack formalised expert networks, face delays in data provision, and encounter challenges aligning climate reporting with national and EU policy goals.
5. Countries generally lack sufficient procedures for the consideration, approval, and review of reporting. Strengthening these procedures could enhance the robustness and effectiveness of national systems.
6. Countries without legal frameworks for reporting could benefit from formalising their national systems to enhance accountability and ensure consistent long-term practices. Robust legal arrangements facilitate inter-ministerial collaboration, improve data exchange, and ensure timely reporting. Less formal systems tend to face challenges in coordinating and securing input from relevant ministries.
7. PaMs and emission projections reporting is generally aligned with the GHG inventory and the EU national energy and climate progress reporting (NECPR). The good alignment with the GHG emission inventory, is largely attributable to the long-standing arrangements for the inventory systems, which often serve as a robust foundation for reporting projectio
8. While many countries have established quality control procedures, significant deficiencies remain in the quality and timeliness of PaMs and emission projections reporting, with some counties lacking established QA/QC systems.
9. Formalised policy monitoring and evaluation practices remain insufficient in most countries, resulting in low reporting of PaMs impacts.
10. Public consultation practices in climate policymaking and reporting vary significantly between countries, highlighting the need for enhanced practices to improve transparency and aligning with participatory governance principles.

Based on the identification of existing challenges, the report presents key recommendations for countries and the EU institutions to improve the robustness of national (and Union) systems. Countries are strongly encouraged not only to set up and maintain, but also to continuously improve their national systems, as they provide the foundation for reliable data that informs climate policy, tracks progress toward goals, and aligns with international commitments. Legal frameworks must be underpinned by political will, adequate financial resources, and standardised procedures. Tailored training programs, and structured cross-border learning initiatives, supported by the EU and EEA, are useful to foster innovation and build long-term institutional capacity across Member States. This will also contribute to solutions for capacity constraints. Member States may improve the objectivity and transparency of reporting through independent advisory councils or formalised policy monitoring tools. Innovative digital solutions, such as the use of Big Data and Artificial Intelligence, can play a crucial role in bridging existing gaps in quality of reporting and equipping national systems to meet future challenges. Public participation mechanisms, such as citizen assemblies, can enhance transparency and trust in governance systems. Effective framing of climate issues is also essential to garner broader support for climate governance. Therefore, it is important to emphasise co-benefits, like clean energy access, health improvements, or economic gains, to enhance public and political engagement through.