Suchergebnisse

Source at https://doi.org/10.17223/2312461X/18/12 . ; У многих коренных народов Арктики есть более длительный опыт взаимодействия с местными природными ресурсами, чем у русских или других государственных народов. Какие именно подходы к управлению ресурсами и территорией существуют у коренных народов? В чем эти подходы отличаются друг от друга? В статье дается анализ отношений двух народов к управлению природными ресурсами на своей земле в условиях наличия общего регулирования российским государством, которое принимает законы, основанные на экстрактивизме. На материале полевых исследований показана ценность изучения традиций лидерства и того, что мы называем «тягой к государственности» у якутов-саха и ненцев. Мы анализируем, почему народ саха старается обеспечить свое участие в освоении Арктики через принятие региональных законов, в то время как ненцы, наоборот, сосредоточены прежде всего на решении проблем в отношениях с промышленностью, которые непосредственно касаются ведения их оленеводческого и рыболовного образа жизни. Это становится понятным, когда мы учитываем историю специфического социального строя каждого народа и его традиционные институты руководства. В ходе сравнения раскрывается неожиданно богатое разнообразие практик управления природными ресурсами в «этнической» Российской Арктике, сосуществующих в общих рамках единого правового пространства, созданного законами о деятельности добывающей промышленности в Российской Федерации.

This chapter introduces the main features of Russian youth policy and focuses on how it is being implemented in the territories classified as the Arctic zone by Russian law. While Russia does not have a specific law on youth or on the Arctic, both are strategically important for the development of the country, and numerous legal and political measures are implemented for youth in the Arctic. The chapter analyses three levels of regulation pertaining to youth in the Arctic, reflecting the organizational levels of the Russian state, that is, the federal, regional and municipal. We first trace how the main principles of national youth policy are interpreted differently in the regional administrative units of the Arctic. We then illustrate the implementation of particular municipal programmes through case studies from the cities of Neryungri (Yakutia), Novy Urengoy (Yamal), and Kirovsk/Apatity (Murmansk Region). We conclude that Russian law cannot currently handle the challenges facing Arctic youth, because it is too fragmented and antiquated. Furthermore, funding is lacking for its implementation, rendering some legislation tokenistic in nature and limited in effect. Federal laws on youth and the Arctic might solve that problem if backed by budget programmes. In the region, the main focus of youth policy is producing qualified personnel for the extractive industries, a focus too narrow to make the Arctic attractive enough to youth as place in which to realize their dreams. However, our cases show that there is more agency in Russia's Arctic regions than the image of a strong centralized federal state with a strong president might suggest.

For the past three decades, risk has occupied center stage in the energy discourse. Systemic risks have proven particularly challenging for government energy planners and corporate executives, as they are characterized by their complexity, uncertainty, ambiguity, and ability to causing ripple effects throughout economic, social, and political structures. In this article we analyze two approaches to governing systemic risks arising out of energy megaprojects, one mandated under the Russian legal and regulatory regime and one employed by the largely indigenous hunters, fishermen, and reindeer herders residing in the Sakha Republic. Our study focuses on the 4000-km-long natural gas transmission system "Power of Siberia" to be constructed in the sub-Arctic part of the region. We employ a complimentary and corroborative analysis of legal texts, fieldwork observations, semi-structured interviews, and transcripts of official meetings. We establish that the approach to risk taken by the people who occupy the land that the Power of Siberia traverses could provide a useful insight for handling systemic risks in connection with pipeline transportation systems. We also determine that the current Russian legal and regulatory regime fails to provide an adequate basis for governing such risks. We conclude the article by identifying four pathways for integrating valuable elements of the indigenous approach into the current legal and regulatory framework.

State-region relations involve negotiations over the power to (re)-constitute local spaces. While in federal states, power-sharing ostensibly gives regions a role over many space-making decisions, power asymmetries affect this role. Where centralization trends may erode regional agency, law can provide an important tool by which regions can assert influence. We examine a case where, in response to a proposed Russian federal law highly unpopular with a regional population, the region's government sought to ameliorate its potential impacts by using opportunities to co-produce the law, amending regional legislation, and strategically implementing other federal and regional laws to protect its territory.