Search results

In April 2010, Russia and Norway surprisingly resolved their border dispute in the Barents Sea. Crucial for the signing of the agreement on the future maritime boundary was the negotiation routine gained over the previous 40 years. Cooperation in the fishing industry and, since the end of the 1980s, in environmental protection as well built trust between the two countries. Compromise became the norm, even when positions were far apart beforehand. Adapted from the source document.

In the Barents region, Norway & Russia are in conflict over ecological issues. This involves fishing quotas & fishing equipment, the over-fishing of Atlantic cod, the clean up of radioactive waste left on the Kola Peninsula by the Soviet Northern Fleet, C02 emissions & nuclear safety. In order to regulate these conflicts, both countries are working at the bilateral level & in transnational forums such as the Euro-Arctic Barents Region. The results of such cross-border environmental protection efforts have been quite modest The erratic actions of the Russian environmental authority & its break up under Vladimir Putin both limit environmentalists' ability to act & weaken cooperation. Adapted from the source document.

Western governments & international organizations have since the late 1990s been involved in efforts to combat tuberculosis & HIV in north-west Russia & the Baltic states, & reform the post-Soviet healthcare system. WHO's tuberculosis strategy DOTS encountered fierce resistance in the Russian tuberculosis establishment, but has been implemented in the north-western rim regions in Russia & all Baltic states. While many view Western aid as a welcome contribution, others feel the problems are exaggerated by the West. The Western emphasis on prison reform & sex workers also meets resistance in the post-Soviet context. Adapted from the source document.

The article discusses implementation of Russia's international obligations in fisheries management, nuclear safety, & air pollution control. Empirical evidence is taken from the country's northwestern region. A main theoretical question is to what extent the observed level of compliance with international agreements can be explained by the nature of the problem & agreements at hand, & by the implementation activities of public authorities & target groups. The implementation performance in the case of fisheries management can be explained mainly by both positive & negative elements in public authorities' implementation efforts. In air pollution control, the nature of the commitments, ie, the very limited need for behavioral changes, is the main explanation for implementation performance. The picture is a bit more complex in the case of nuclear safety where all the factors reviewed have had a moderate or considerable effect on implementation performance. Notably, institutional conflict at the federal level has hampered implementation, while regional authorities have since the mid-1990s indulged in constructive collaboration with various federal agencies. 2 Tables, 1 Figure, 65 References. Adapted from the source document.