Ten Years of LT-LEDS: A Moment to Strengthen Just Transition Planning
Date: 13 April 2026
Inspired by the intervention of Viktoria Dimitrova, Senior Associate, 2050 Pathways Platform, during the GGGI-GGKP webinar on Embedding Just Transitions into Long-Term Climate Strategies.
Why 2026 Matters for Long-Term Climate Strategies
At the GGGI-GGKP webinar on Embedding Just Transitions into Long-Term Climate Strategies, Viktoria Dimitrova, Senior Associate at the 2050 Pathways Platform, reflected on why 2026 is becoming an important year for taking stock of Long-Term Low-Emission Development Strategies, or LT-LEDS. More than a decade after long-term strategies became part of the international climate planning landscape, countries are now entering a period where implementation, transparency, and renewed ambition are increasingly connected.
The timing matters. Countries are finalizing updated Nationally Determined Contributions, preparing the second round of Biennial Transparency Reports, and beginning to shape expectations for the second Global Stocktake. Together, these processes create a window to look more critically at what LT-LEDS have delivered so far, how they have influenced national planning, and what still needs to be strengthened for the next decade of climate action.
As Ms. Dimitrova put it, “2026 is shaping up as a landmark year for long-term strategy analysis.”
A Forthcoming Flagship Report on the Impact of LT-LEDS
This moment also gives particular relevance to the 2050 Pathways Platform’s forthcoming flagship report on the impact of long-term strategies. Although the report is still under development, its preliminary findings are already helping to frame an important global conversation on just transitions and LT-LEDS: how long-term strategies can move beyond vision-setting and become practical instruments for implementation.
The report aims to capture the real-world impact of LT-LEDS, test emerging findings with experts and practitioners, and develop practical recommendations for governments, development partners, and the UNFCCC process on how to maximize the role of long-term strategies in the decade ahead.
Its methodology follows long-term strategies at several levels. It begins with an overview of the 80 long-term strategies submitted to the UNFCCC to date, followed by survey-based analysis drawing on stakeholders across 40 countries. The next stage will focus on country case studies, allowing the report to examine specific impacts in greater depth.
The publication of the report is planned for September 2026. And its preliminary findings offer an important first glimpse into a shared global challenge.
A Shared Diagnosis: Just Transition Is Recognized, But Not Yet Operationalized
The preliminary findings show a strong alignment with GGGI’s insight brief on just transition in G20 LT-LEDS. Both analyses point to a similar diagnosis: just transition elements are increasingly recognized in long-term strategies, but the socioeconomic dimensions still need further development. The challenge is no longer only whether just transition is mentioned, but whether strategies provide enough detail to guide implementation, support affected communities, and track whether outcomes are fair.
The First Gap: Socioeconomic Analysis Needs More Depth
One of the clearest gaps concerns socioeconomic analysis. The GGGI brief found that only 29 percent of G20 strategies identify specific groups or regions facing transition risks. The preliminary findings from the 2050 Pathways Platform’s flagship survey reinforce this concern, showing that wider socioeconomic impact assessment and climate risk and vulnerability assessment are among the least included elements in LT-LEDS processes. This creates a self-reinforcing problem: when these dimensions are not built into long-term strategies from the start, stakeholders have less basis to assess their usefulness or demand improvements over time.
Examples from Morocco and Jamaica illustrate why this matters. In Morocco, further analysis after the submission of the country’s long-term strategy included macroeconomic assessment of implementation measures. However, stakeholder feedback suggested that the assessment could go further in detailing employment impacts. In Jamaica, recent work on cost-benefit analysis for the implementation of its long-term strategy integrated macroeconomic analysis and disaggregated findings by sector, including GDP growth, employment projections, household consumption, fiscal variables, and debt-to-GDP ratio. These elements do not answer every just transition question, but they provide policymakers with stronger evidence to prepare for equitable climate action.
The Second Gap: Local and Regional Realities Are Still Underdeveloped
A second gap is the regional and local dimension. The flagship survey found that alignment between regional or local plans and long-term climate goals received the lowest effectiveness rating among the outcomes assessed. This mirrors the GGGI brief’s finding that regional and rural development is one of the weakest thematic areas in the reviewed LT-LEDS. Without spatially disaggregated analysis and attention to affected groups, national strategies cannot design meaningful support for communities that may be most exposed to transition risks.
The Third Gap: Monitoring Just Transition Outcomes
The third gap concerns monitoring. Monitoring, reporting, and verification systems are repeatedly identified as a priority for strengthening long-term strategies, especially where they are linked to financing and tracking progress. Without adequate monitoring of just transition outcomes, governments may have limited ability to identify unfair outcomes, adjust course, or test whether implementation remains fit for purpose.
A stakeholder reflection from Morocco captured this point clearly: “strengthening M&E and better integrating socioeconomic dimensions, such as jobs, just transition, territorial development would make long-term strategies more operational.”
From Long-Term Vision to Practical Use: What Future LT-LEDS Need to Do Differently
The next chapter for LT-LEDS is not about questioning their success, but about making them more useful. As countries move from long-term vision-setting toward implementation, these strategies need to become more operational, more grounded in socioeconomic realities, and more responsive to the communities, sectors, and regions most affected by the transition.
In practice, this implies several priorities. Socioeconomic assessments should be more systematically integrated into LT-LEDS, with greater disaggregation by region, sector, and vulnerable groups. Transition impacts need to be mapped at the subnational level and explicitly linked to investment sequencing and policy design. At the same time, just transition considerations should be embedded into existing BTR and MRV frameworks, including through the integration of relevant indicators, rather than creating fragmented or parallel reporting systems.
