Analysis of regulatory mechanisms for carbon neutrality, emphasizing renewable energy sources and investment needs.
The purpose of this article is to analyze the mechanisms for decarbonizing the energy sector in the context of achieving carbon neutrality in Kazakhstan. The study presents the results of research on the transformation of the country’s energy system, which accounts for more than 2/3 of national greenhouse gas emissions. An analysis of regulatory mechanisms for decarbonizing the energy sector is provided, and recommendations for their improvement to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 are developed. Sources of investment for transforming the energy balance and accelerating the development of renewable energy sources (RES) are considered. An analysis of tariff policy, the carbon regulation system, RES support mechanisms, and a comparative analysis with international practice are presented. An assessment of achieving carbon neutrality across Kazakhstan’s regions is conducted, taking into account economic instruments in the strategic program as of 2023. The article is prepared within the framework of implementing the Paris Agreement for participation in COP-29 (Baku, November 2024). The scientific significance of the work lies in a comprehensive analysis of regulatory mechanisms considering international experience and the development of adapted recommendations. The practical value consists in substantiating investments of $318.1 billion for energy balance transformation, identifying Kazakhstan’s lag behind developed countries in the share of RES (7.0% vs. 42% in the EU) and carbon price ($2–5/t vs. $80–90/t in the EU), as well as recommendations for accelerating tariff reform, reducing free quotas by 4–5% annually, developing comprehensive RES support, and ensuring a just transition. The results contribute to the implementation of national climate commitments and sustainable development
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nygymetov et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: