Report on semi-­structured interviews til a certain date.’ The slowness of the transition process is exacerbated by a complex decision-making system, and it takes five to six years to pass a law. A government respond­ent thinks that this should be resolved by changing the Con­stitution or at least passing a law that will prescribe a time limit for making decisions, even if they are negative. An ac­ademic respondent states that one of the problems is that the European Union‘will not negotiate with the entities, but [only] with the state’ commenting that the energy sector is under the legislation of the entity level. The Energy Community is considered an important factor in the inclusive energy transition processes in the region by all participants, but most of them think that it would be more productive for Bosnia and Herzegovina if a stricter sanction mechanism is put in place. According to almost all interviewees, the electricity market in Bosnia and Herzegovina exists only on paper, because in reality there are only three entity suppliers fully owned by the state. Only our interviewee from the government sector believes that the electricity market‘functions as in the rest of Europe’ and names one major private supplier. Another interviewee explains that the inclusion of other business en­tities in the supply chain is not in the interest of the state be­cause‘the three existing large power companies are financ­ing political parties’. One of the members of the working group for the develop­ment of the NECP states that in 2016,‘something serious started happening, foreign suppliers started coming be­cause cheaper electricity from Western Europe was compet­itive. With the EU emissions trading system(ETS) and rising prices in Europe, it quickly died down’. He explained that the subsidies received by national power companies are huge and consist of benefits to mines and thermal power plants, non-payment of certain concessions, and non-payment of full contributions for salaries. He states that, according to a study done by the Energy Community, the abolition of sub­sidies would raise prices by 30 to 50 per cent. With such prices, the market would be more open, because European electricity would be more competitive.‘Without the estab­lishment of an organised market, it is difficult to integrate RES due to their variability’. A government respondent also announces the establishment of a power exchange, which three other interviewees point out should have already been established. Most of the stakeholders think that the pandemic did not influence the transition processes. One of the interviewees states that some activities did slow down, but mostly be­cause of the European lockdown. One NGO interviewee mentions the fact that the construction of Unit 7 of the Tu­zla power plant was postponed due to the fact that the company in charge is from Wuhan but stresses that this is just a delay and not a cancellation. When it comes to financing, most experts believe that re­sources from pre-accession funds are underused, and most often blocked due to slow absorption. An NGO respondent declared that funds are available and that international grants are a significant source, but the funded projects fo­cus, for example, on the energy efficiency of public build­ings, from which in his opinion citizens do not benefit. He believes that the‘polluter pays principle’ should be intro­duced. One of the participants from the government sector states that a tax on CO 2 should be introduced. He also believes that thermal power plants and mines should be closed down gradually, and the process should be transparent and inclusive. A member of the expert group for drafting the Na­tional Energy and Climate Plan believes that the ETS mecha­nism is the only right way to finance the energy transition. He states that‘roughly calculating based on the example of a scheme from Montenegro, 150 million EUR could be col­lected per year’. Energy poverty All interviewees are well acquainted with the topic of ener­gy poverty, but consider it poorly known to the public. They agree that there is no systematic approach to the problem, and one respondent from the government says that there have been several attempts to create an energy poverty plan on the entity level and even one on the state level, but that there is no definition of energy poverty and effort should be put in the discussion of the topic itself. Four interviewees who participated in the drafting or had an insight into the working version of the NECP said that energy poverty is mentioned, but not elaborated in the NECP. Employment According to experts who participated in the interviews, there is no organised approach to the problem of job losses in thermal power plants and the mining industry, although one respondent points out,‘the people living off of the mines are aware that mines are a thing of the past’. All in­terviewees agree that the state is just buying social peace. One interviewee points out that from the current number of workers in thermal power plants and mines,‘maybe 10 per cent will be needed for new technologies’,‘and taking care of surplus workers is not yet in focus’. Some of the inter­viewees think that the number of workers working in the mines is smaller than the publicly available data shows, be­cause a significant number of workers are administrative staff or drivers and machine operators in surface mines. One respondent points out that work is being done on re­training programmes for the application of new technolo­gies in high schools, and that the same is planned for facul­ties. One interviewee believes that by adapting to the mar­ket and changing the curricula, professors would be de­prived of their subjects and consequently their salaries, and that this would lead to further problems. Another interview­ee mentions that in some high schools, student quotas are not aligned to the real labour market needs, but are formed 65