Suchergebnisse

Development studies; Russia; Far East; International affairs; Energy; Shanghai cooperation organization; Economic development; Security policy; Multilateral organizations; Diplomacy; Regionalism; Russian–European relations; Russia's "pivot to the East"; Annexation of Crimea; Regional politics; Eurasia; Ukraine; Sanctions regime; Foreign policy

An analysis of Russia's response to globalization. This book explores how Russian domestic politics shape this international engagement. Thematically, the focus is on Russia's external engagement with areas of policy relating to globalization, namely energy, climate, health, direct foreign investment, finance, and international terrorism. JULIAN COOPER Professor of Russian Economic Studies at the Centre for Russian and East European Studies, European Research Institute, University of Birmingham, UK ROBERT LEVGOLD Marshall D. Shulman Professor Emeritus at Columbia University, USA, and Director of the Euro-Atlantic Security Initiative JAKUB M. GODZIMIRSHI Senior Research Fellow at the Department for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Norway NIKITA LONGMAIN Professor in the World Economy Department at St. Petersburg State University, Russia INDRA OVERLAND Senior Research Fellow at the Department for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Norway JULIE WILHELMSEN Research Fellow at the Department for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Norway ELANA WILSON ROWE Senior Research Fellow at the Department for Russian and Eurasian Studies, Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, Norway

Abstract
This article argues that, to grasp how global ordering will be impacted by planetary-level changes, we need to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and how ecosystems are being governed. Our inquiry builds upon—but extends beyond—the environmental governance measures that have garnered the most scholarly attention so far. The dataset departs from the current literature on regional environmental governance by taking ecosystems themselves as the unit of analysis and then exploring whether and how they are governed, rather than taking a starting point in environmental institutions and treaties. The ecosystems researched—large-scale marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems—have been previously identified by a globe-spanning, natural science inquiry. Our findings highlight the uneven extent of ecosystem governance—both the general geographic extent and certain "types" of ecosystems seemingly lending themselves more easily to ecosystem-based cooperation. Furthermore, our data highlight that there is a wider range of governance practices anchored in ecosystems than the typical focus on environmental institutions reveals. Of particular significance is the tendency by political actors to establish multi-issue governance anchored in the ecosystems themselves and covering several different policy fields. We argue that, in light of scholarship on ecosystem-anchored cooperation and given the substantive set of cases of such cooperation identified in the dataset, these forms of ecosystem-anchored cooperation may have particularly significant ordering effects. They merit attention in the international relations scholarship that seeks to account for the diversity of global ordering practices.

The Anthropocene has given rise to growing efforts to govern the world's ecosystems. There is a hitch, however, ecosystems do not respect sovereign borders; hundreds traverse more three states and thus require complex international cooperation. This article critically examines the political and social consequences of the growing but understudied trend towards transboundary ecosystem cooperation. Matchmaking the new hierarchy scholarship in International Relations (IR) and political geography, the article theorises how ecosystem discourse embodies a latent spatially exclusive logic that can bind together and bound from outside unusual bedfellows in otherwise politically awkward spaces. We contend that such 'ecosystemic politics' can generate spatialised 'broad hierarchies' that cut across both Westphalian renderings of space and the latent post-colonial and/or material inequalities that have hitherto been the focus of most of the new hierarchies scholarship. We illustrate our argument by conducting a multilevel longitudinal analysis of how Caspian Sea environmental cooperation has produced a broad hierarchy demarking and sharpening the boundaries of the region, become symbolic of Caspian in-group competence and neighbourliness, and used as a rationale for future Caspian-shaped cooperation. We reason that if ecosystemic politics can generate new renderings of space amid an otherwise heavily contested space as the Caspian, further research is warranted to explore systemic hierarchical consequences elsewhere.

The Anthropocene has given rise to growing efforts to govern the world's ecosystems. There is a hitch, however, ecosystems do not respect sovereign borders; hundreds traverse more three states and thus require complex international cooperation. This article critically examines the political and social consequences of the growing but understudied trend towards transboundary ecosystem cooperation. Matchmaking the new hierarchy scholarship in International Relations (IR) and political geography, the article theorises how ecosystem discourse embodies a latent spatially exclusive logic that can bind together and bound from outside unusual bedfellows in otherwise politically awkward spaces. We contend that such 'ecosystemic politics' can generate spatialised 'broad hierarchies' that cut across both Westphalian renderings of space and the latent post-colonial and/or material inequalities that have hitherto been the focus of most of the new hierarchies scholarship. We illustrate our argument by conducting a multilevel longitudinal analysis of how Caspian Sea environmental cooperation has produced a broad hierarchy demarking and sharpening the boundaries of the region, become symbolic of Caspian in-group competence and neighbourliness, and used as a rationale for future Caspian-shaped cooperation. We reason that if ecosystemic politics can generate new renderings of space amid an otherwise heavily contested space as the Caspian, further research is warranted to explore systemic hierarchical consequences elsewhere.

Development studies; Russia; Far East; International affairs; Energy; Shanghai cooperation organization; Economic development; Security policy; Multilateral organizations; Diplomacy; Regionalism; Russian–European relations; Russia's "pivot to the East"; Annexation of Crimea; Regional politics; Eurasia; Ukraine; Sanctions regime; Foreign policy

Introduction -- Arctic states and regional governance -- Regional governance of Arctic Ocean : the Arctic-Five (A5) and the Arctic 5+5 -- From international to regional : sub-national units in Arctic governance -- Civil society in Arctic governance : indigenous peoples' organizations, observers, and Arctic residents -- Private sector actors and Arctic governance -- Conclusion : governing complexity in the Arctic : past, present, future.