Bosnia and Herzegovina Doesn’t Have a Strategy Problem – It Has an Implementation Problem*
Bosnia and Herzegovina is not short of strategies. On paper, the country has almost all of it: green transition frameworks, energy efficiency policies, renewable energy targets, and even principles of a just transition. Everything appears aligned with European priorities and ambitions.
But the problem has never been what is planned. The problem is what is actually delivered.
In practice, citizens and businesses face a very different reality. Instead of clear rules and predictable procedures, they encounter inconsistent regulations, complex administrative processes, and limited institutional support. What should be a structured transition increasingly feels like a bureaucratic maze.
This gap between ambition and implementation is not a technical issue – it is the central challenge of the green transition in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The consequences are already visible. The energy system remains heavily dependent on coal-fired power plants, while renewable energy development lags behind its potential. The electricity grid is outdated and insufficiently adapted to new technologies, and investors face lengthy procedures and regulatory uncertainty. At the same time, external pressures are intensifying. The EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) is moving toward full implementation, posing direct risks to the competitiveness of domestic industries. Yet, despite years of warnings, preparation for these changes remains limited. Without timely adjustment, this could lead not only to higher costs for exporters, but also to declining exports, job losses, and broader economic impacts, as key sectors such as metals and cement are particularly exposed.
Instead of proactive policy, the costs of adjustment are increasingly being shifted onto companies and citizens, those least equipped to deal with uncertainty. At the same time, failing to act means missing significant opportunities: growing demand for low-carbon production, access to EU markets and financing, and the potential to attract investment through nearshoring and green value chains.
This issue is particularly visible at the household level. Citizens who want to invest in rooftop solar or improve the energy efficiency of their homes often face the same administrative requirements as large investors. Procedures differ across institutions, approval processes are slow, and access to information is limited.
The result is predictable: many simply give up.
And that is the core problem. Without active citizen participation, the green transition cannot be either fast or sustainable. This is particularly important because more decentralized energy systems – including households acting as “prosumers” – can reduce energy costs, improve energy security, and even create additional income opportunities for citizens.
Ironically, the solutions already exist.
Local initiatives across Bosnia and Herzegovina demonstrate that well-designed measures can deliver tangible results. Energy efficiency programmes, heating system upgrades, and small-scale renewable investments have already reduced energy costs, improved living conditions, and lowered emissions. More broadly, evidence shows that cleaner industries and renewable energy not only reduce pollution, but also tend to create more productive and better-paid jobs, while lowering long-term energy costs for both households and businesses.
The message is clear: progress does not necessarily require large-scale investments, but rather clear rules, accessible financing, and functioning institutions.
However, isolated successes cannot compensate for the absence of a systemic approach. Without coordination, clearly defined responsibilities, and long-term planning, these examples remain limited in scope and difficult to scale. If Bosnia and Herzegovina is to make real progress, the focus must shift from designing strategies to implementing them. This is precisely where Green Industrial Policies can play a critical role – by linking climate objectives with economic development, supporting new industries, and ensuring that the transition creates jobs and opportunities rather than simply imposing costs.
This means simplifying procedures and harmonising them across all levels of government. It means establishing clear and transparent rules instead of leaving room for discretionary decision-making. It means improving coordination among institutions that currently operate in parallel rather than together. And finally, it requires serious investment in modernising the electricity grid. It also means actively supporting workers and regions affected by the transition – through reskilling, targeted social policies, and investment in new economic activities – to ensure that no one is left behind.
Without these steps, even the best-designed policies will remain ineffective.
The green transition is no longer a future objective – it is already underway. The only question is whether Bosnia and Herzegovina will manage it or be forced to adapt under pressure. The cost of inaction will only grow over time, while early and coordinated action can unlock economic, social, and environmental benefits.
The country does not need another strategy. It needs the ones it already has to start working.
*Note:
This Op-Ed was made possible with the support of the Open Society Foundations – Western Balkans. Its contents are the sole responsibility of Centre for Development Evaluation and Social Science Research (CREDI) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the donor.
It was produced as part of the implementation of a regional project „Empowering the Western Balkans through Green Industrial Policies“ in which CREDI acts as a partner for Bosnia and Herzegovina. The project builds on the Green Industrial Policy (GIP) Framework for the Western Balkans, developed with the support of the Open Society Foundations, and included three community events aimed at strengthening public understanding and fostering dialogue on the role of green industrial policies in economic transformation, job creation, and environmental protection.
The views presented in this text are based on discussions held during these community events, which brought together policymakers, civil society organisations, media representatives, academia, and companies, and reflect issues that were consistently raised across these discussions.