Environmental Sustainability
#11Key Findings
In the area of environmental sustainability, Austria falls into the upper-middle ranks (rank 11).
The government has committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2040, and has steadily increased its environmental and climate policy budget. However, greenhouse gas emissions have hardly fallen since 1990, and have increased substantially in the traffic sector. Coalition parties have been unable to agree on emissions limits in specific sectors.
A CO2 pricing scheme has been introduced, but experts say costs are too low to drive significant behavioral changes. Air pollution is a major issue in alpine valleys and cities, though the country excels in other areas, such as drinking water quality. Climate protection is increasingly linked to health policy.
Austria’s track record on protecting biodiversity and implementing international environmental agreements is mixed, in part due to the complex federal system. The country has high rates of “emergency” use of banned pesticides, and has struggled to meet EU Natura-2000 goals.
The government has committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2040, and has steadily increased its environmental and climate policy budget. However, greenhouse gas emissions have hardly fallen since 1990, and have increased substantially in the traffic sector. Coalition parties have been unable to agree on emissions limits in specific sectors.
A CO2 pricing scheme has been introduced, but experts say costs are too low to drive significant behavioral changes. Air pollution is a major issue in alpine valleys and cities, though the country excels in other areas, such as drinking water quality. Climate protection is increasingly linked to health policy.
Austria’s track record on protecting biodiversity and implementing international environmental agreements is mixed, in part due to the complex federal system. The country has high rates of “emergency” use of banned pesticides, and has struggled to meet EU Natura-2000 goals.
Graph View
Graph View
How committed is the government to the goal of achieving net zero emissions by 2050?
10
9
9
The government is clearly committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
8
7
6
7
6
The government is largely committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
5
4
3
4
3
The government is only somewhat committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
2
1
1
The government is not at all committed to achieving climate neutrality by 2050.
The Austrian government committed itself to achieving climate neutrality by 2040, rather than 2050.
The government’s environmental and climate policy budget has been growing steadily in recent years. Several key measures underscore the government’s seriousness about tackling climate change. Perhaps the most spectacular measure was the introduction of an annual “climate ticket” in late 2021, priced at approximately €1,100. This ticket allows holders to use all forms of public transport – trains, buses, trams, and subways – across the country. Around the same time, the government introduced a pricing scheme for CO2 emissions, with fees increasing annually. However, many experts consider these fees insufficient to motivate significant behavioral change among the population. In late 2023, the government ruled out any new gas and oil heating in buildings constructed from 2024 onward.
It is significant that the government has, to date, failed to renew the “Climate Protection Law,” which expired in 2020 (Prager 2023). Critics have cited this failure as evidence of the government’s lack of commitment to achieving its self-imposed 2040 target. Notably, the coalition parties in the ÖVP-Green government have been unable to agree on permissible emission levels across various sectors, such as traffic, agriculture, and buildings. Even the original 2020 law faced criticism, including from the Austrian Court of Audit, for its vague formulations regarding regulations in different sub-areas.
The hard facts speak clearly: Since 1990, Austria has barely reduced its greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions in the traffic sector have increased significantly. An empirical assessment by the Austrian Environmental Agency found that emissions decreased by 6% in 2022. However, despite this reduction, there are few other European countries with reductions as modest as Austria’s (Umweltbundesamt 2022).
One explanation for the notable discrepancy between formal commitment and substantive accomplishment is Austria’s early status as a forerunner, which then fell behind many other countries, including even many latecomers (Der Standard 2023). In the early 1990s, Austria was skeptical about joining the European Union, as some feared the country would have to compromise on its comparatively high environmental standards at the time.
Overall, Austria continues to fare in the middle of the international community. In the most recent Climate Change Performance Index, Austria ranks 32nd out of 63 countries (Laufer and Prager 2023), which together are responsible for about 90% of greenhouse gas emissions. This overall score is composed of several sub-scores in different areas. The worst sub-score was in the area of energy consumption, where Austria ranked 51st out of 63. Better scores were achieved in the areas of renewable energies, greenhouse gas emissions, and climate policy, with Austria ranking 19th in each of these areas.
As indicated above, climate change policies are being reviewed by the Austrian Court of Audit. However, as the court’s remit is confined to financial issues, some experts have recently called for the creation of a Climate Court of Audit, specifically devoted to reviewing the government’s climate change policies.
In a much-noted decision, the Austrian Constitutional Court dismissed a complaint by four Austrian citizens committed to suing the government for disregarding its own pledges and not seriously addressing climate change policies to avoid fatal harm to Austrian citizens. The Court argued that the government had more leeway in pursuing those goals than the plaintiffs contended. Shortly before, the Court had already dismissed a similar complaint by 12 young Austrians for formal reasons (Der Standard 2023a, 2023b).
Citations:
Laufer, Nora, and Alicia Prager. 2023. “Energieverbrauch zu hoch: Österreich stagniert beim Klimaschutz.” https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000198795/energieverbrauch-zu-hoch-oesterreich-stagniert-im-klimaschutz
Der Standard. 2023. “Warum kommt Österreich beim Klimaschutz nicht in die Gänge?” available at https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000180434/standard-zukunftsgespraech-klima-wie-gelingt-die-klimawende
Prager, Alicia. 2023. “Österreich hat seit 1.000 Tagen keinen Plan zum Klimaschutz.” https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000188655/oesterreich-hat-seit-1000-tagen-keinen-plan-zum-klimaschutz
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/minischritte-beim-klimaschutz-in-oesterreich-und-beim-klimapgipfel/402215232
https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVII/III/292/imfname_945967.pdf
Der Standard. 2023a.https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000177929/kinder-klimaklage-vom-vfgh-aus-formalen-gruenden-zurueckgewiesen
Der Standard. 2023b. “https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000195830/klimaklage-von-kindern-kommt-erneut-vor-den-verfassungsgerichtshof”
Umweltbundesamt. 2022. “Sustainability Report.” https://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/ueberuns/nachhaltigkeitsbericht_en.pdf
The government’s environmental and climate policy budget has been growing steadily in recent years. Several key measures underscore the government’s seriousness about tackling climate change. Perhaps the most spectacular measure was the introduction of an annual “climate ticket” in late 2021, priced at approximately €1,100. This ticket allows holders to use all forms of public transport – trains, buses, trams, and subways – across the country. Around the same time, the government introduced a pricing scheme for CO2 emissions, with fees increasing annually. However, many experts consider these fees insufficient to motivate significant behavioral change among the population. In late 2023, the government ruled out any new gas and oil heating in buildings constructed from 2024 onward.
It is significant that the government has, to date, failed to renew the “Climate Protection Law,” which expired in 2020 (Prager 2023). Critics have cited this failure as evidence of the government’s lack of commitment to achieving its self-imposed 2040 target. Notably, the coalition parties in the ÖVP-Green government have been unable to agree on permissible emission levels across various sectors, such as traffic, agriculture, and buildings. Even the original 2020 law faced criticism, including from the Austrian Court of Audit, for its vague formulations regarding regulations in different sub-areas.
The hard facts speak clearly: Since 1990, Austria has barely reduced its greenhouse gas emissions. Emissions in the traffic sector have increased significantly. An empirical assessment by the Austrian Environmental Agency found that emissions decreased by 6% in 2022. However, despite this reduction, there are few other European countries with reductions as modest as Austria’s (Umweltbundesamt 2022).
One explanation for the notable discrepancy between formal commitment and substantive accomplishment is Austria’s early status as a forerunner, which then fell behind many other countries, including even many latecomers (Der Standard 2023). In the early 1990s, Austria was skeptical about joining the European Union, as some feared the country would have to compromise on its comparatively high environmental standards at the time.
Overall, Austria continues to fare in the middle of the international community. In the most recent Climate Change Performance Index, Austria ranks 32nd out of 63 countries (Laufer and Prager 2023), which together are responsible for about 90% of greenhouse gas emissions. This overall score is composed of several sub-scores in different areas. The worst sub-score was in the area of energy consumption, where Austria ranked 51st out of 63. Better scores were achieved in the areas of renewable energies, greenhouse gas emissions, and climate policy, with Austria ranking 19th in each of these areas.
As indicated above, climate change policies are being reviewed by the Austrian Court of Audit. However, as the court’s remit is confined to financial issues, some experts have recently called for the creation of a Climate Court of Audit, specifically devoted to reviewing the government’s climate change policies.
In a much-noted decision, the Austrian Constitutional Court dismissed a complaint by four Austrian citizens committed to suing the government for disregarding its own pledges and not seriously addressing climate change policies to avoid fatal harm to Austrian citizens. The Court argued that the government had more leeway in pursuing those goals than the plaintiffs contended. Shortly before, the Court had already dismissed a similar complaint by 12 young Austrians for formal reasons (Der Standard 2023a, 2023b).
Citations:
Laufer, Nora, and Alicia Prager. 2023. “Energieverbrauch zu hoch: Österreich stagniert beim Klimaschutz.” https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000198795/energieverbrauch-zu-hoch-oesterreich-stagniert-im-klimaschutz
Der Standard. 2023. “Warum kommt Österreich beim Klimaschutz nicht in die Gänge?” available at https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000180434/standard-zukunftsgespraech-klima-wie-gelingt-die-klimawende
Prager, Alicia. 2023. “Österreich hat seit 1.000 Tagen keinen Plan zum Klimaschutz.” https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000188655/oesterreich-hat-seit-1000-tagen-keinen-plan-zum-klimaschutz
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/minischritte-beim-klimaschutz-in-oesterreich-und-beim-klimapgipfel/402215232
https://www.parlament.gv.at/dokument/XXVII/III/292/imfname_945967.pdf
Der Standard. 2023a.https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000177929/kinder-klimaklage-vom-vfgh-aus-formalen-gruenden-zurueckgewiesen
Der Standard. 2023b. “https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000195830/klimaklage-von-kindern-kommt-erneut-vor-den-verfassungsgerichtshof”
Umweltbundesamt. 2022. “Sustainability Report.” https://www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/ueberuns/nachhaltigkeitsbericht_en.pdf
Graph View
How committed is the government to protecting the public from environmental health risks?
10
9
9
The government is clearly committed to the goal of protecting environmental health.
8
7
6
7
6
The government is largely committed to the goal of protecting environmental health.
5
4
3
4
3
The government is only somewhat committed to the goal of protecting environmental health.
2
1
1
The government is not at all committed to the goal of protecting environmental health.
In terms of many established indicators, such as PM2.5 exposure or lead exposure, Austria has ranked in the middle range of OECD countries. However, for other indicators, particularly the quality of drinking water, Austria has consistently been among the top performers in the OECD.
According to the WHO 2023 country report on Austria, 15% of deaths from stroke and ischemic heart disease in Austria are caused by air pollution, and 18% of deaths from diarrhea are caused by unsafe drinking water, sanitation, and inadequate personal hygiene. (The latter data are remarkable as the same source indicates that just 1% of the population is without safe drinking water, and 0% of the population is without safe sanitation.) Further, according to the same source, less than one out of 100,000 children under five die from poisonings every year.
Sanitation problems are particularly pronounced at the level of individual water supplies from house wells. These wells are still common practice outside metropolitan areas and larger municipalities. Public authorities do not monitor these supplies, which often results in unknown contamination of private water sources. Approximately 7% of the total population obtains their water from private wells (Ministry of Agriculture n.d.).
Air pollution is a significant problem in alpine valleys with heavy traffic, such as the Inntal, as well as in larger cities. Although recent improvements in air quality have been noted, the continued transport of goods on one of the main alpine crossings and the stringent EU directives limiting traffic continue to present major challenges in these areas.
Health protection has been acknowledged as a key responsibility of the government at the legislative level since the late 1990s, when the government introduced a health promotion law (“Gesundheitsförderungsgesetz”). A health promotion strategy has also been implemented to facilitate effective cooperation among the central government, states, and social insurance agencies. In recent years, special emphasis has been placed on various aspects of children’s health.
There has been a growing acknowledgment among political leaders in Austria that climate protection is essentially health protection. Several new measures have been launched to highlight this connection by linking the health sector to climate policies. For example, in 2023 hospitals and various other care units were assigned special resources to reduce their climate footprint.
Citations:
https://ccca.ac.at/wissenstransfer/apcc/broschuere-klimawandel-und-gesundheit
https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/environmental-health-austria-2023-country-profile
https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20231024_OTS0149/klimastrategie-als-fahrplan-fuer-klimaneutrales-gesundheitswesen-vorgestellt-bild
https://agenda-gesundheitsfoerderung.at/sites/agenda-gesundheitsfoerderung.at/files/inline-files/Factsheet_Strategien%20f%C3%BCr%20Gesundheitsfoerderung_0922.pdf
Ministry of Agriculture. n.d. “Wasserversorgung und Wasserverbrauch in Österreich.” https://info.bml.gv.at/themen/wasser/nutzung-wasser/wasserversorgung/versorgung.html
According to the WHO 2023 country report on Austria, 15% of deaths from stroke and ischemic heart disease in Austria are caused by air pollution, and 18% of deaths from diarrhea are caused by unsafe drinking water, sanitation, and inadequate personal hygiene. (The latter data are remarkable as the same source indicates that just 1% of the population is without safe drinking water, and 0% of the population is without safe sanitation.) Further, according to the same source, less than one out of 100,000 children under five die from poisonings every year.
Sanitation problems are particularly pronounced at the level of individual water supplies from house wells. These wells are still common practice outside metropolitan areas and larger municipalities. Public authorities do not monitor these supplies, which often results in unknown contamination of private water sources. Approximately 7% of the total population obtains their water from private wells (Ministry of Agriculture n.d.).
Air pollution is a significant problem in alpine valleys with heavy traffic, such as the Inntal, as well as in larger cities. Although recent improvements in air quality have been noted, the continued transport of goods on one of the main alpine crossings and the stringent EU directives limiting traffic continue to present major challenges in these areas.
Health protection has been acknowledged as a key responsibility of the government at the legislative level since the late 1990s, when the government introduced a health promotion law (“Gesundheitsförderungsgesetz”). A health promotion strategy has also been implemented to facilitate effective cooperation among the central government, states, and social insurance agencies. In recent years, special emphasis has been placed on various aspects of children’s health.
There has been a growing acknowledgment among political leaders in Austria that climate protection is essentially health protection. Several new measures have been launched to highlight this connection by linking the health sector to climate policies. For example, in 2023 hospitals and various other care units were assigned special resources to reduce their climate footprint.
Citations:
https://ccca.ac.at/wissenstransfer/apcc/broschuere-klimawandel-und-gesundheit
https://www.who.int/publications/m/item/environmental-health-austria-2023-country-profile
https://www.ots.at/presseaussendung/OTS_20231024_OTS0149/klimastrategie-als-fahrplan-fuer-klimaneutrales-gesundheitswesen-vorgestellt-bild
https://agenda-gesundheitsfoerderung.at/sites/agenda-gesundheitsfoerderung.at/files/inline-files/Factsheet_Strategien%20f%C3%BCr%20Gesundheitsfoerderung_0922.pdf
Ministry of Agriculture. n.d. “Wasserversorgung und Wasserverbrauch in Österreich.” https://info.bml.gv.at/themen/wasser/nutzung-wasser/wasserversorgung/versorgung.html
Graph View
How committed is the government to preserving ecosystems and protecting biodiversity?
10
9
9
The government is clearly committed to protecting ecosystems and biodiversity.
8
7
6
7
6
The government is largely committed to protecting ecosystems and biodiversity.
5
4
3
4
3
The government is only somewhat committed to protecting ecosystems and biodiversity.
2
1
1
The government is not at all committed to protecting ecosystems and biodiversity.
Recent Austrian governments have been committed to protecting ecosystems and biodiversity, though their track record is mixed. In some areas, such as the adjusted emissions growth rate for nitrous oxides and grassland loss, Austria ranks in the middle among European and/or OECD countries. The status of Austrian forests has been relatively stable, with forested territory even growing slightly in recent years. This growth is supported by the fact that a significant portion of forests in Austria is privately owned (82%, a score only exceeded by Portugal).
However, regarding several other indicators, Austria has performed conspicuously poorly. This is particularly true for the use of pesticides banned EU-wide. According to figures by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe published in 2023, Austria had the largest “emergency admissions” of banned pesticides among all EU member states. Between 2019 and 2022, Austria issued no fewer than 20 such admissions.
The situation is not better in the area of species protection. Recent figures from the European Environment Agency show that 83% of all species in Austria were not in good condition, placing Austria second to last in the EU.
Since joining the Austrian federal government in 2020, the Greens have driven several significant changes. In late 2022, Green federal environmental minister Leonore Gewessler launched a new biodiversity strategy, as foreshadowed in the ÖVP-Green coalition agreement. By 2023, 30% of the country’s territory should be designated as specifically protected areas, including the expansion of national parks and other highly protected zones. Additionally, by 2023, the “red list” of endangered species in Austria should be reduced by 30%, a goal to be achieved through measures like limiting pesticide use. Finally, 35% of Austria’s agriculture should be converted to organic farming by the same year.
The government’s biodiversity strategy has been sharply criticized by many experts, including members of the Austrian Biodiversity Council. While the existence of a Federal Ministry for the Environment in 2020 was seen as the only fully convincing aspect of the ÖVP-Green government’s environmental and biodiversity policies, most other features were considered problematic.
The creation of a Biodiversity Fund (with €80 million by 2026) was welcomed, but experts argue that the volume should be expanded to €1 billion. Additionally, the environmental protection budgets for the states were deemed inadequate. For example, in 2021, the state of Lower Austria had an environmental policy budget of just €15 million, compared to €450 million for road construction and maintenance.
The most pressing issue was the ongoing rate of land sealing, currently at 11.3 hectares per day. Experts insist this must be radically reduced to 2.5 hectares by 2025 and just 1 hectare by 2030.
Lastly, Austria’s performance in implementing international agreements, such as the EU’s Natura-2000 goals, has been conspicuously poor. A particular problem identified is the complex division of competencies between the federation and the states.
Citations:
https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/grl
https://www.global2000.at/publikationen/report-banned-pesticides
https://www.meinbezirk.at/c-lokales/oesterreich-belegt-vorletzten-platz-beim-artenschutz_a5358076
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/artenschutz-neu-viel-mehr-bio-landwirtschaft-etwas-mehr-schutzzonen/402256209
https://science.apa.at/power-search/13989497262453436291
https://science.apa.at/power-search/804385466566097238
However, regarding several other indicators, Austria has performed conspicuously poorly. This is particularly true for the use of pesticides banned EU-wide. According to figures by Pesticide Action Network (PAN) Europe published in 2023, Austria had the largest “emergency admissions” of banned pesticides among all EU member states. Between 2019 and 2022, Austria issued no fewer than 20 such admissions.
The situation is not better in the area of species protection. Recent figures from the European Environment Agency show that 83% of all species in Austria were not in good condition, placing Austria second to last in the EU.
Since joining the Austrian federal government in 2020, the Greens have driven several significant changes. In late 2022, Green federal environmental minister Leonore Gewessler launched a new biodiversity strategy, as foreshadowed in the ÖVP-Green coalition agreement. By 2023, 30% of the country’s territory should be designated as specifically protected areas, including the expansion of national parks and other highly protected zones. Additionally, by 2023, the “red list” of endangered species in Austria should be reduced by 30%, a goal to be achieved through measures like limiting pesticide use. Finally, 35% of Austria’s agriculture should be converted to organic farming by the same year.
The government’s biodiversity strategy has been sharply criticized by many experts, including members of the Austrian Biodiversity Council. While the existence of a Federal Ministry for the Environment in 2020 was seen as the only fully convincing aspect of the ÖVP-Green government’s environmental and biodiversity policies, most other features were considered problematic.
The creation of a Biodiversity Fund (with €80 million by 2026) was welcomed, but experts argue that the volume should be expanded to €1 billion. Additionally, the environmental protection budgets for the states were deemed inadequate. For example, in 2021, the state of Lower Austria had an environmental policy budget of just €15 million, compared to €450 million for road construction and maintenance.
The most pressing issue was the ongoing rate of land sealing, currently at 11.3 hectares per day. Experts insist this must be radically reduced to 2.5 hectares by 2025 and just 1 hectare by 2030.
Lastly, Austria’s performance in implementing international agreements, such as the EU’s Natura-2000 goals, has been conspicuously poor. A particular problem identified is the complex division of competencies between the federation and the states.
Citations:
https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/grl
https://www.global2000.at/publikationen/report-banned-pesticides
https://www.meinbezirk.at/c-lokales/oesterreich-belegt-vorletzten-platz-beim-artenschutz_a5358076
https://kurier.at/politik/inland/artenschutz-neu-viel-mehr-bio-landwirtschaft-etwas-mehr-schutzzonen/402256209
https://science.apa.at/power-search/13989497262453436291
https://science.apa.at/power-search/804385466566097238
Graph View
To what extent is the government committed and credible in designing and promoting global environmental protection regimes and policies?
10
9
9
Government policy and institutions are fully aligned with efforts to achieve global environmental sustainability.
8
7
6
7
6
Government policy and institutions are largely aligned with efforts to achieve global environmental sustainability.
5
4
3
4
3
Government policy and institutions are somewhat aligned with efforts to achieve global environmental sustainability.
2
1
1
Government policy and institutions are not at all aligned with efforts to achieve global environmental sustainability.
Austria’s approach to global environmental policy has long been marked by contradictions. Rhetorically, Austria – the government, political parties, and the media – has frequently portrayed itself as a frontrunner in global governance, from Kyoto to Copenhagen and Paris. In practice, however, the country has not fully lived up to this self-acclaimed role.
Austria remains proud of its 1978 decision to forgo nuclear energy, being one of the first countries worldwide to do so. This decision has become a national narrative, portraying Austria as a leader in enlightened environmental consciousness. However, in terms of net greenhouse gas emissions, Austria occupies an average position among OECD countries, although the reductions achieved over the past decade have been slightly more significant than in many other countries.
Austria’s participation rate in global and regional multilateral environmental agreements has been below average (P20.4). The same is true for Austria’s effective contributions to Green Climate Funds (P20.5).
The participation of the Greens in the new government formed in early 2020, and the appointment of a Green climate minister, marked a tangible change in Austria’s international performance. However, the exact policy effects remain contested. At the Glasgow climate conference in late 2021, Climate Minister Leonore Gewessler (Green) went out of her way to present and position Austria as a future frontrunner, committing the government to increasing its contributions to the international Green Climate Fund from €26 million to €130 million by 2023. In mid-2023, Minister Gewessler announced that Austria would further increase its payments to the fund to €160 million for 2024 to 2027, or €40 million per year.
The current three-year program of Austrian Developmental Policy 2022 – 2024, agreed upon by major state actors, parliaments, and members from the economic and scientific communities and civil society groups, sets out the principles, goals, and priorities of governmental policy in this area. Bilateral cooperation strategies are being developed in close collaboration with recipient countries, taking into account different social and cultural settings and including technological advice and support. Particular emphasis is placed on the involvement of women and the protection of the specific rights of children and people with disabilities. There are also Regional Cooperation Strategies, which seek to develop collaborations between different countries in the same region, considering the bilateral engagement of various Austrian actors.
Citations:
https://www.bmk.gv.at/service/presse/gewessler/20230412_gcf.html
https://www.bmeia.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Zentrale/Aussenpolitik/Entwicklungszusammenarbeit/Dreijahresprogramm_der_oesterreichischen_Entwicklungspolitik_2022-2024.pdf
Austria remains proud of its 1978 decision to forgo nuclear energy, being one of the first countries worldwide to do so. This decision has become a national narrative, portraying Austria as a leader in enlightened environmental consciousness. However, in terms of net greenhouse gas emissions, Austria occupies an average position among OECD countries, although the reductions achieved over the past decade have been slightly more significant than in many other countries.
Austria’s participation rate in global and regional multilateral environmental agreements has been below average (P20.4). The same is true for Austria’s effective contributions to Green Climate Funds (P20.5).
The participation of the Greens in the new government formed in early 2020, and the appointment of a Green climate minister, marked a tangible change in Austria’s international performance. However, the exact policy effects remain contested. At the Glasgow climate conference in late 2021, Climate Minister Leonore Gewessler (Green) went out of her way to present and position Austria as a future frontrunner, committing the government to increasing its contributions to the international Green Climate Fund from €26 million to €130 million by 2023. In mid-2023, Minister Gewessler announced that Austria would further increase its payments to the fund to €160 million for 2024 to 2027, or €40 million per year.
The current three-year program of Austrian Developmental Policy 2022 – 2024, agreed upon by major state actors, parliaments, and members from the economic and scientific communities and civil society groups, sets out the principles, goals, and priorities of governmental policy in this area. Bilateral cooperation strategies are being developed in close collaboration with recipient countries, taking into account different social and cultural settings and including technological advice and support. Particular emphasis is placed on the involvement of women and the protection of the specific rights of children and people with disabilities. There are also Regional Cooperation Strategies, which seek to develop collaborations between different countries in the same region, considering the bilateral engagement of various Austrian actors.
Citations:
https://www.bmk.gv.at/service/presse/gewessler/20230412_gcf.html
https://www.bmeia.gv.at/fileadmin/user_upload/Zentrale/Aussenpolitik/Entwicklungszusammenarbeit/Dreijahresprogramm_der_oesterreichischen_Entwicklungspolitik_2022-2024.pdf