Sustainable Development and Actors of Regional Environmental Governance: Eurasia at the Crossroads

Obydenkova, Anastassia

doi:10.1080/10758216.2022.2109116

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, authoritarian regimes lack accountability to the national and international public. This lack of accountability finds expression in hollow statements, where "non-democratic leaders, and the international organizations they support might merely mimic climate rhetoric" (Nazarov & Obydenkova, 2022, p. 397; see also Ambrosio et al, 2021;Hall et al, 2021;Obydenkova, 2022a). Thus, participation in democratic institutions contributes to democratic norm diffusion, and Russia's participation in the AC, which is a democratic institution with democratic member states, had a positive influence on Russia and Russia-West cooperation.…”

Section: The Ac and Arctic Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Russia’s Security Perceptions and Arctic Governance

Borozna

2024

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Russia’s war in Ukraine further strained Russia’s relations with the West and negatively influenced Arctic regional governance, especially after seven members of the Arctic Council paused cooperation with Russia. The rationale of the suspension was to express disapproval by seven Arctic states of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. However, the suspension of cooperation with Russia within the Arctic Council format prompted some observers to question the relevance and utility of the institution. Russia never expressed its wish to leave the Council and continues to express its desire for multilateral cooperation in the region. This raises the question: Can Russia’s assertive stance in Ukraine coexist with peaceful cooperation in the Arctic? In order to answer this question, this article addresses the following questions: How does the geopolitical tension shape Russia’s approach to Arctic governance? And what is the role of military and economic security in Russia’s Arctic policy? The article uses a comparative method combined with discourse analysis to establish a change in Russia’s view on Arctic governance before and after the war in Ukraine.

show abstract

Section: The Ac and Arctic Governancementioning

confidence: 99%

Russia’s Security Perceptions and Arctic Governance

Borozna

2024

PaG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is unknown if some innate loyalty to Russia within the EaEU (as well as other Russialed regional organizations, see Obydenkova (2022c) and Overland (2022)) has been retarding this progress towards engaging in the Arctic (Kochtcheeva 2021; Obydenkova 2022c) and whether or not this psychological barrier has been broken by the invasion of Ukraine. But if the EaEU is going to exert any influence on Russia's Arctic policies in terms of the environment, it is incumbent upon EaEU member states to move past this disengagement and involve themselves (individually and collectively) in international and multilateral dialogues on the Arctic, including obtaining observer status in the Arctic Council.…”

Section: Is Russia's Arctic Policy Up For Negotiation?mentioning

confidence: 99%

In our (frozen) backyard: the Eurasian Union and regional environmental governance in the Arctic

Hartwell

2023

Climatic Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional environmental governance has emerged as a viable alternative to supranational environmental solutions, using regional and local knowledge and actors to tailor more effective policies. This does not deny a role for supranational institutions, however, which can enable their members to effectively shift towards such a decentralized and polycentric approach. In specific regions such as the Arctic, with many national and local actors interested in environmental improvement, such impetus from meta-organizations (i.e., organizations comprised of organizations) could result in beneficial environmental outcomes. This paper examines an underutilized institution, the Eurasian Union (EaEU), and the role it currently plays in facilitating regional environmental governance. Focusing on its largest member, Russia—and the only member with an Arctic linkage—I explore the tension between supranational facilitation and interference in an area not directly affecting all members. Despite explicit Russian interest in this realm, the EaEU may be able to influence Russian environmental policy for the better via multilateral means and internal mechanisms. By challenging the Russian monopoly on Arctic policy in the EaEU, these additional voices may create space for environmental innovation in areas not central to Russia’s interests.

show abstract

“…Other consequences of climate change in the Arctic covered in the literature include a significant transformation in natural disasters' pattern, which implies increase in frequency and intensity of catastrophic events (Porfiriev and Makarova 2014), extinction of multiple Arctic species, and drastic effect on the lifestyle of the indigenous population (Gassiy 2019;IPCC 2022). Moreover, numerous physical and ecological changes occurring in polar territories have irreversible impacts stretching far beyond the Arctic territories, albeit of undertaking strong adaptation and resilience building policy action (Lenton 2012;Semenov 2021;Obydenkova 2022b). Finally, the Arctic is also a fragile diplomatic zone shared among Russia and the USA, Canada, Finland, Norway, Iceland, Sweden, and Denmark, including Greenland.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change and challenges to sustainable development in the Russian Arctic

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Arctic region is one of the most exposed to the global climate change. Russia accounts for more than a half of the whole Arctic territory and population and allocates most of the economic activity of the region. From the Soviet time till now, the Arctic region also accounts for a substantial share of Russia's wealth. The article analyzes often ambiguous knowledge on climate change implications for the long-term economic development of the Russian Arctic. Based on the review of the key policy documents issued in Russia and ongoing and planned development programs, the study aspires to contribute more clarity on Russia's standing in the Arctic region. We aim to analyze the convergence of Russian climate and Arctic policies boosting the synergies between each other. The paper discovers, among other issues, the climate change adaptation priorities in policy areas aimed at minimizing net costs of climate change. While policies rhetorically aim at contributing to resilient and sustainable growth in the Russian North, they remain under-developed in accounting for multiple climate-related risks. Our analysis suggests that a comprehensive framework of Arctic policy measures should be centered around climate change as a core factor underlying the future of the region and should encompass two main policy dimensions: (a) strengthening the knowledge base on climate change, the adjunct risks, and emerging opportunities in the region and (b) developing the system for climate change risk management and resilience building ensuring that regional diversity and climatic and socioeconomic features of various locations are taken into serious account.

show abstract

Sustainable Development and Actors of Regional Environmental Governance: Eurasia at the Crossroads

Cited by 10 publications

References 61 publications

Russia’s Security Perceptions and Arctic Governance

Russia’s Security Perceptions and Arctic Governance

In our (frozen) backyard: the Eurasian Union and regional environmental governance in the Arctic

Climate change and challenges to sustainable development in the Russian Arctic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About