Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T22:30:09.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations and Russian Environmental Governance: Accountability, Participation and Collaboration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 May 2014

Ekaterina Sofronova ,
Cameron Holley  and
Vijaya Nagarajan
Ekaterina Sofronova
Affiliation:
Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Cameron Holley
Affiliation:
The University of New South Wales, Australia (UNSW) Law School; Connected Waters Initiative Research Centre, National Centre for Groundwater Research and Training, Sydney (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Vijaya Nagarajan
Affiliation:
Macquarie Law School, Macquarie University (Australia). Email: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article examines the role of environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) in Russia and the impact of tightening governmental accountability measures. Drawing on 18 interviews conducted in 2012–13 with Russian and international ENGOs, the article examines three key governance issues, namely: the collaborative relationship between the state and ENGOs, the impact of accountability measures on ENGO activities, and the relationships between ENGOs themselves. The findings reveal that ENGOs maintain a legitimate and effective role within Russian environmental governance. However, their legitimacy and success is significantly limited and threatened by increasing accountability measures and state actions. The article accordingly identifies a number of recommendations for increasing the likelihood of successful ENGO action in Russian environmental governance, including improving ENGO collaboration with the state and resolving tensions between participation and accountability.

Keywords

Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGOs)RussiaEnvironmental Governance AccountabilityParticipationCollaboration
Type
Articles
Information
Transnational Environmental Law , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , October 2014 , pp. 341 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Braithwaite, J., ‘Responsive Regulation and Developing Economies’ (2006) 34(5) World Development, pp. 884–98Google Scholar; Dubash, N. & Morgan, B., ‘Understanding the Rise of the Regulatory State of the South’ (2012) 6(3) Regulation & Governance, pp. 261–81, at 272Google Scholar; Braithwaite, J., Regulatory Capitalism: How It Works, Ideas for Making It Work Better (Edward Elgar, 2008)Google Scholar; Braithwaite, J., ‘Neoliberalism or Regulatory Capitalism’, RegNet Occasional Paper No. 5. (Australian National University, 2005), pp. 1–48Google Scholar, at 34, available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=875789.

2 Freeman, J., ‘The Private Role in Public Governance’ (2000) 75 New York University Law Review, pp. 543–675.Google Scholar

3 Hochstetler, K., ‘Civil Society and the Regulatory State of the South: A Commentary’ (2012) 6(3) Regulation & Governance, pp. 362–70; Dubash & Morgan, n. 1 above, at p. 262.Google Scholar

4 P. Stubbs, ‘Stretching Concepts Too Far? Multi-Level Governance, Policy Transfer and the Politics of Scale in South East Europe’ (2005) VI(2) Southeast European Politics, pp. 66–87; Dellas, E., Pattberg, P. & Betsill, M., ‘Agency in Earth System Governance: Refining a Research Agenda’ (2011) 11(1) International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, pp. 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 Crotty, J. & Rodgers, P., ‘Environmental Bureaucracy Regional Interpretation and the Response of Key Actors’ (2012) 59(4) Problems of Post-Communism, pp. 15–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6 Mol, A.P.J., ‘Environmental De-institutionalization in Russia’ (2009) 11(3) Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, pp. 223–41Google Scholar; Tokunaga, M., ‘Environmental Governance in Russia: The “Closed” Pathway to Ecological Modernization’ (2010) 42(7) Environment and Planning, pp. 1686–704, at 1699.Google Scholar

7 G. Hønneland & J. Jørgensen, ‘Federal Environmental Governance and the Russian North’ (2005) 29(1) Polar Geography, pp. 27–42; Richter, J., ‘The Ministry of Civil Society? The Public Chambers in the Regions’ (2009) 56(6) Problems of Post-Communism, pp. 7–20.Google Scholar

8 See, e.g., Henry, L., ‘Between Transnationalism and State Power: The Development of Russia’s Post-Soviet Environmental Movement’ (2010) 19(5) Environmental Politics, pp. 756–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Shlapentokh, V., ‘Trust in Public Institutions in Russia: The Lowest in the World’ (2006) 39(2) Communist and Post-Communist Studies, pp. 153–74.Google Scholar

10 Report on the State of Civil Society in the Russian Federation 2011 (Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, 2012), pp. 6–10.

11 Report on the State of Civil Society in the Russian Federation 2009 (Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, 2010), pp. 18–9.

12 Ibid., pp. 19–20.

13 Oldfield, J., Russian Nature: Exploring the Environmental Consequences of Societal Change (Ashgate, 2005).Google Scholar

14 Crotty & Rodgers, n. 5 above, at pp. 15–6.

15 In the early 1990s, the democratization of Russia fostered a decentralization of state power. Ten years later, however, the pendulum swung back in favour of ‘recentralization’: see Nysten-Haarala, S. & Kotilainen, J., ‘Institutions, Interest Groups and Governance of Natural Resources in Russia’, in Nysten-Haarala, S. (ed), The Changing Governance of Renewable Natural Resources in Northwest Russia (Ashgate, 2009), pp. 9–29, at 17–8.Google Scholar

16 Wernstedt, K., ‘Environmental Protection in the Russian Federation: Lessons and Opportunities’ (2002) 45(4) Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, pp. 493–516Google Scholar; Mol, n. 6 above, at pp. 229–30; V. Kotov & E. Nikitina, ‘Reorganisation of Environmental Policy in Russia: The Decade of Success and Failures in Implementation and Perspective Quests’ (2002), available at: http://www.feem.it/NR/rdonlyres/59A79BBF-DE58-4819-BC3F-C0FE71384402/346/5702.pdf.

17 According to Art. 73 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, regulation of natural resources is under the joint jurisdiction of the federation and the regions.

18 Mol, n. 6 above, at pp. 230–1.

19 Biermann, F. et al. ., ‘Earth System Governance: A Research Framework’ (2010) 10(4) International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, pp. 277–98.Google Scholar

20 See Holley, C., ‘Public Participation, Environmental Law and New Governance: Lessons from Empirical Research for Designing Effective Participation Processes’ (2010) 27 Environmental and Planning Law Journal, pp. 360–91Google Scholar; Fung, A., ‘Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance’ (2006) 66 Public Administration Review, pp. 66–75, at 67.Google Scholar

21 For more on public chambers see Federalnyj zakon N 32-FZ ot 04.04.2005 ‘Ob Obshhestvennoj palate Rossijskoj Federatsii’ (Federal Law No. 32-FZ of 4 Apr. 2005 ‘On the Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation’). Note that the terms ‘public chamber’ and ‘civil chamber’ have been used interchangeably on the website http://www.oprf.ru/en/about. For more on public councils see Ukaz Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federatsii N 842 ot 04.08.2006 ‘O poryadke obrazovaniya obshhestvennyh sovetov pri federalnyh ministerstvah’ (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 842 of 4 Aug. 2006 ‘On a procedure for the formation of public councils at the federal ministries’).

22 Crotty & Rodgers, n. 5 above, at p. 16; Richter, n. 7 above.

23 Grabosky, P., ‘Beyond Responsive Regulation: The Expanding Role of Non-State Actors in the Regulatory Process’ (2013) 7(1) Regulation & Governance, pp. 114–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 See Postanovlenie Pravitelstva Rossijskoj Federatsii N 159 ot 22.02.2012 ‘Ob utverzhdenii Pravil provedeniya obshchestvennogo obsuzhdeniya proektov federalnyh konstitutsionnyh zakonov i federalnyh zakonov’ (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 159 of 22 Feb. 2012 ‘On approval of the Rules of the public discussion of draft federal constitutional laws and federal laws’).

25 Scott, C., ‘Accountability in the Regulatory State’ (2000) 27(1) Journal of Law and Society, pp. 38–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26 Black, J., ‘Constructing and Contesting Legitimacy and Accountability in Polycentric Regulatory Regimes’ (2008) 2(2) Regulation & Governance, pp. 137–64, at 150.Google Scholar

27 Federalnyj Zakon 7-FZ ot 12.01.1996 ‘O nekommercheskih organizaciyah’ (Federal Law No. 7-FZ of 12 Jan. 1996 ‘On non-commercial organizations’); Federalnyj Zakon N18-Φ3 ot 19.05.1995 ‘Ob obshestvennyh ob’edineniyah’ (Federal Law No. 82-FZ of 19 May 1995 ‘On public associations’).

28 Federal Law No. 7-FZ, ibid., Art. 15, pt 1.2; Federal Law No. 82-FZ, ibid., Art. 19.

29 Federal Law No. 7-FZ, n. 27 above, Art. 32.

30 Federalnyj zakon N 121-FZ ot 20.07.2012 ‘O vnesenii izmenenij v nekotorye zakonodatelnye akty Rossijskoj Federacii po regulirovaniju deyatelnosti nekommercheskih organizatsij vypolnyaushih funktsii inostrannyh agentov’ (Federal Law No. 121-FZ of 20 July 2012 ‘On introducing amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation regarding the regulation of activities of non-commercial organizations performing the function of foreign agents’).

31 In the Russian language, the expression ‘foreign agent’ has a negative connotation and it is often associated with a spy – i.e. an employee of the secret service of an enemy country who acts for money in the interests of the enemy country.

32 The term ‘coloured revolutions’ generally refers to changes of political regimes organized by civil society activists and NGOs using non-violent protests and other forms of social resistance. Examples of these revolutions in the post-Soviet countries are the Rose Revolution in Georgia in 2003, the Orange Revolution in Ukraine in 2004–05, and the Tulip Revolution in Kyrgyzstan in 2005.

33 Office of the President of Russia, ‘Interview for the German ARD’, 5 Apr. 2013 (Presidential interview), available at: http://eng.news.kremlin.ru/news/5216; BBC Russian, ‘Putin Reminded the FSB about “Foreign Interests” of NGO’, 14 Feb. 2013, available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/russian/russia/2013/02/130214_putin_speech_fsb_ngo.shtml (in Russian).

34 Human Rights Watch, ‘Russia: Reject Proposed Changes to Rules on Foreign-Funded NGOs’, 5 and 12 July 2012, available at: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/07/13/russia-reject-proposed-changes-rules-foreign-funded-ngos.

35 Open letter from S. Lavrov, Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs, 18 Jan. 2006 (Lavrov letter), available at: http://www.mid.ru/bdomp/brp_4.nsf/e78a48070f128a7b43256999005bcbb3/2950a6a45eccca71c32570fb0028f609!OpenDocument. The same arguments have been used by President Putin and Prime Minister Medvedev in their interviews and publications, e.g, the Presidential interview, n. 33 above; the interview of the Russian Prime Minister, Dmitry Medvedev, to the agency ‘Agence France-Presse’ and the newspaper Le Figaro, 26 Nov. 2012, available at: http://government.ru/news/5919.

36 Lavrov letter, ibid.; Presidential interview, n. 33 above.

37 The material on the Summit is available at: http://www.g20civil.com/newsg20/1655.

38 Orlov, D., ‘The New Russian Age and Sovereign Democracy’ (2008) 46(5) Russian Politics and Law, pp. 72–6, at 76.Google Scholar

39 N. Popescu, ‘Russia’s Soft Power Ambitions’ (2006) (1–12) CEPS Policy Briefs, pp. 1–3, at 1.

40 Biermann et al., n. 19 above, at p. 283.

41 Müntel, G., ‘Closing the Gap to Europe? An Assessment of Change and Adaptation of Environmental Governance in the Russian Exclave of Kaliningrad’ (2006) 12(2) Contemporary Politics, pp. 139–55, at 146–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42 Patton, M., Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (Sage, 2002)Google Scholar; Tuckett, A., ‘Qualitative Research Sampling: The Very Real Complexities’ (2004) 12(1) Nurse Researcher, pp. 47–61.Google Scholar

43 Gray, R., Bebbington, J. & Collison, D., ‘NGOs, Civil Society and Accountability: Making the People Accountable to Capital’ (2006) 19(3) Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, pp. 319–48.Google Scholar

44 Alcock, F., ‘Conflicts and Coalitions Within and Across the ENGO Community’ (2008) 8(4) Global Environmental Politics, pp. 66–91.Google Scholar

45 Gray, Bebbington & Collison, n. 43 above, at p. 327.

46 Breckenridge, L., ‘Nonprofit Environmental Organizations and the Restructuring of Institutions for Ecosystem Management’ (1998) 25(4) Ecology Law Quarterly, pp. 692–706, at 695.Google Scholar

47 Gray, Bebbington & Collison, n. 43 above, at p. 324.

48 Ibid., at p. 325; Betsill, M.M. & Corell, E., NGO Diplomacy: The Influence of Nongovernmental Organizations in International Environmental Negotiations (The MIT Press, 2008)Google Scholar; Dryzek, J. et al. ., Green States and Social Movements: Environmentalism in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Norway (Oxford University Press, 2003).Google Scholar

49 Hochstetler, n. 3 above, at pp. 363–4.

50 Cox, R., ‘Civil Society at the Turn of the Millennium: Prospects for an Alternative World Order’ (1999) 25(1) Review of International Studies, pp. 3–28, at 10.Google Scholar

51 Taylor, B., ‘Law Enforcement and Civil Society in Russia’ (2006) 58(2) Europe-Asia Studies, pp. 193–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

52 Ibid., p. 211.

53 Stewart, R.B., ‘The Reformation of American Administrative Law’ (1975) 88(8) Harvard Law Review, pp. 1667–813.Google Scholar

54 Farber, D.A., ‘The Inevitability of Practical Reason: Statutes, Formalism, and the Rule of Law’ (1992) 45 Vanderbilt Law Review, pp. 533–59.Google Scholar

55 Gormley, W.T. Jr., ‘Regulatory Issue Networks in a Federal System’ (1986) 18(4) Polity, pp. 595–620CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Thornton, D., Kagan, R.A. & Gunningham, N., ‘Compliance Costs, Regulation, and Environmental Performance: Controlling Truck Emissions in the US’ (2008) 2(3) Regulation & Governance, pp. 275–92, at 275–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

56 Biermann et al., n. 19, at p. 279.

57 Karkkainen, B.C., ‘New Governance in Legal Thought and in the World: Some Splitting as Antidote to Overzealous Lumping’ (2004) 89 Minnesota Law Review, pp. 471–91, at 473–5.Google Scholar

58 Holley, C., ‘Facilitating Monitoring, Subverting Self-Interest and Limiting Discretion: Learning from “New” Forms of Accountability in Practice’ (2010) 35(1) Columbia Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 127–211, at 128–132Google Scholar; Glasbergen, P., Biermann, F. & Mol, A.P.J. (eds), Partnerships, Governance and Sustainable Development: Reflections on Theory and Practice (Edward Elgar, 2007).Google Scholar

59 Braithwaite, J. & Drahos, P., Global Business Regulation (Cambridge University Press, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

60 Castells, M., ‘Materials for an Exploratory Theory of the Network Society’ (2000) 51 British Journal of Sociology, pp. 5–24Google Scholar; Rhodes, R.A.W., Understanding Governance: Policy Networks, Governance, Reflexivity and Accountability (Open University Press, 1997).Google Scholar

61 C. Parker, ‘Meta-Regulation: Legal Accountability for Corporate Social Responsibility’ (2006), available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=942157.

62 Conley, A. & Moote, M., ‘Evaluating Collaborative Natural Resource Management’ (2003) 16(5) Society and Natural Resources, pp. 371–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fung, A. & Wright, E.O., ‘Countervailing Power in Empowered Participatory Governance’, in Fung, A. & Wright, E.O. (eds), Deepening Democracy: Institutional Innovations in Empowered Participatory Governance (Verso, 2003), pp. 259–91.Google Scholar

63 Gunningham, N., Grabosky, P. & Sinclair, D., Smart Regulation (Oxford University Press, 1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Dryzek, J., Deliberative Democracy and Beyond (Oxford University Press, 2002)Google Scholar; Holley, C., Gunningham, N. & Shearing, C., The New Environmental Governance (Earthscan, 2012).Google Scholar

64 Scott, C., ‘Regulation in the Age of Governance: The Rise of the Post-Regulatory State’, in Jordana, J. & Levi-Faur, D. (eds), The Politics of Regulation: Institutions and Regulatory Reforms for the Age of Governance (Edward Elgar, 2004), pp.145–74.Google Scholar

65 Scott, ibid.

66 Firsova, A. & Taplin, R., ‘Australia and Russia: How Do Their Environmental Policy Processes Differ?’ (2009) 11 Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, pp. 407–26Google Scholar; Henry, L.A. & Douhovnikoff, V., ‘Environmental Issues in Russia’ (2008) 33 Annual Review of Environment and Resource, pp. 437–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

67 Hemment, J.D., ‘The Riddle of the Third Sector: Civil Society, Western Aid and NGOs in Russia’ (2004) 77(2) Anthropological Quarterly, pp. 215–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Crotty, J., ‘Making a Difference? NGOs and Civil Society Development in Russia’ (2009) 61(1) Europe-Asia Studies, pp. 85–108.Google Scholar

68 Mol, n. 6 above; V. Zykov et al., Razvitie normativno-pravovogo regulirovaniya ohrany prirody i ekologicheskoj metrologii (The Development of Legal Regulation of Environmental Protection and Ecological Metrology) (IPK PFUR, 2005).

69 E.g., Crotty & Rodgers, n. 5 above; L. Henry, Red to Green: Environmental Activism in Post-Soviet Russia (Cornell University Press, 2010).

70 Henry, L., ‘Between Transnationalism and State Power: The Development of Russia’s Post-Soviet Environmental Movement’ (2010) 19(5) Environmental Politics, pp. 756–81Google Scholar; Henry, ibid.; Howard, M., ‘Postcommunist Civil Society in Comparative Perspective’ (2002) 10(3) Demokratizatsiya, pp. 285–305.Google Scholar

71 Henry, n. 69 above, at p. 7.

72 Ibid., p. 181. Henry has examined Russian environmental movements and developed the organizational typology of NGOs in Russia depending on their goals, strategies, tools, memberships, funding and relationships with the government.

73 S. Nysten-Haarala & J. Kotilainen, ‘Institutions, Interest Groups and Governance of Natural Resources in Russia’, in Nysten-Haarala, n. 15 above, pp. 9–30, at 12.

74 Henry, n. 69 above, pp. 48–9; L. Riabova & L. Ivanova, ‘Fishery Governance in Northwest Russia’, in Nysten-Haarala, n. 15 above, pp. 77–105, at 85.

75 Ljubownikow, S., Crotty, J. & Rodgers, P.W, ‘The State and Civil Society in Post-Soviet Russia: The Development of a Russian-Style Civil Society’ (2013) 13(2) Progress in Development Studies, pp. 153–66.Google Scholar

76 Henry, n. 69 above; Crotty, n. 67 above.

77 Crotty, n. 67 above, at p. 93.

78 Ibid., at pp. 85–6.

79 J. Crotty & S.M. Hall, ‘Environmental Awareness and Sustainable Development in the Russian Federation’ (2012) Sustainable Development, FirstView online, doi: 10.1002/sd.1542; Howard, M., ‘The Weakness of Postcommunist Civil Society’ (2002) 13(1) Journal of Democracy, pp. 157–69.Google Scholar

80 Crotty, n. 67 above, at pp. 87–8.

81 Howard, n. 70 above, at pp. 293–5, Crotty, J., ‘Managing Civil Society: Democratisation and the Environmental Movement in a Russian Region’ (2003) 36(4) Communist and Post-Communist Studies, pp. 489–508, at 490.Google Scholar

82 Crotty, J. & Hall, S.M., ‘Environmental Responsibility in a Transition Context: Russian NGO Perception and Response’ (2013) 4(31) Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, pp. 667–81.Google Scholar

83 Henry, n. 69 above, pp. 50–3, Mol, n. 6 above; Crotty, J. & Rodgers, P., ‘The Continuing Reorganization of Russia’s Environmental Bureaucracy’ (2012) 59(4) Problems of Post-Communism, pp. 15–26, at 22.Google Scholar

84 B. Kagarlitsky, ‘Perestroika: The Dialectic of Change’ (1988) 1 New Left Review, pp. 169–79, at 171, Zykov et al., n. 68 above, p. 25.

85 Aarhus (Denmark), 25 June 1998, in force 30 Oct. 2001, available at: http://www.unece.org/env/pp/welcome.html.

86 ENGO support for the ratification of the Aarhus Convention has varied over the years; there is currently significant backing for its ratification: see, e.g., ‘After Kremlin Wrecking Balls Have Leveled Environmental Legislation, the Aarhus Convention is a Last, Best Hope’, Bellona, 16 May 2013, available at: http://bellona.org/news/russian-human-rights-issues/access-to-information/2013-05-after-kremlin-wrecking-balls-have-leveled-environmental-legislation-the-aarhus-convention-is-a-last-best-hope.

87 E.W.B. Zakariassen, ‘NGOs in Arkhangelsk – Coping in the Civil Sector after the 2006 NGO Law’, Report prepared for the Norwegian Barents Secretariat in Arkhangelsk and the University of Oslo, 2011, at p. 3.

88 Henry, n. 69 above, at p. 48.

89 Hemment, n. 67 above.

90 Henry, n. 69 above, at p. 46.

91 Javeline, D. & Lindemann-Komarova, S., ‘A Balanced Assessment of Russian Civil Society’ (2010) 63(3) Journal of International Affairs, pp. 171–80, at 179.Google Scholar

92 Ibid., at pp. 137–8.

93 Crotty, n. 67 above, at pp. 85–6.

94 Ljubownikow, Crotty & Rodgers, n. 75 above, at p. 161.

95 Arksey, H. & Knight, P.T., Interviewing for Social Scientists (Sage, 1999), at p. 5.Google Scholar

96 Layder, D., Sociological Practice: Linking Theory and Social Research (Sage, 1998)Google Scholar; Yin, R.K., Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Sage, 2009).Google Scholar

97 The total number of ENGOs in Russia is difficult to estimate. According to the Ministry of Justice, in December 2012 the total number of registered non-commercial organizations (NCO) was approximately 400,000 with 319 branches and representative offices of foreign NCOs. This includes religious organizations, state public–private associations, political parties and others. In contrast, the Civic (Public) Chamber estimated the overall number of registered NGOs to be 115,657. The Federal Statistics Service reports 108,736 NGOs. The number of ENGOs is even more difficult to estimate, because the official database of the Ministry of Justice does not contain this information. To trace ENGOs, we used the term ‘эколог’ as a filter (this is a root from Russian adjective ‘экологuческuие’ (ecological); we opted for the root instead of the whole word to make the search more effective. As a result, we identified 1,651 organizations. This number does not include environmental organizations that do not have ‘ecology’ or ‘ecological’ in their names; nor does it account for a large number of non-registered environmental movements and groups involved in environmental protection.

98 As demonstrated by the preparations for the Sochi Winter Olympics in 2014.

99 E.g., monitoring the migration of birds.

100 Arksey & Knight, n. 95 above, at p. 21.

101 Tokunaga, M., ‘Environmental Governance in Russia: The “Closed” Pathway to Ecological Modernization’ (2010) 42(7) Environment and Planning, pp. 1686–704, at 1699.Google Scholar

102 Ibid.

103 Interviews 1 and 16.

104 Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 21 Aug. 2013, N-642 AKPI13 (Reshenie Verhovnogo Suda RF ot 21 Aug. 2013, N AKPI13-642).

105 Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of 22 Jan. 2004, N-642 AKPI13 (Reshenie Verhovnogo Suda RF ot 22 Jan. 2014, N GKPI03-1225).

106 WWF blog on itar-tass.com, available at: http://www.itar-tass.com/c9/603107.html, interview 1.

107 Federal Law No. 32-FZ, n. 21 above.

108 Ukaz Prezidenta Rossijskoj Federatsii N 842 ot 04.08.2006 ‘O poryadke obrazovaniya obshhestvennyh sovetov pri federalnyh ministerstvah’ (Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 842 of 4 Aug. 2006 ‘On a procedure for the formation of public councils at the federal ministries’).

109 The list of members is available at: http://www.president-sovet.ru/composition/?PAGEN_1=3.

110 Generally, ENGO representatives at councils attend meetings, participate in discussions, voice their positions on issues for discussion and give recommendations. Decisions are made by majority voting. They are not binding on the relevant state body. See, e.g., the provision on the public council under the MNR of the Russian Federation, available at: http://www.mnr.gov.ru/activities/list.php?part=1235&sphrase_id=323510.

111 Interview 11, the Public Council on Environmental Issues at the Governor of Nizhny Novgorod region (available at: http://www.government-nnov.ru/?id=96916), or decisions of the Civic Chamber of Nizhegorodsky Region on Waste Management in Nizhny Novgorod (available at: http://www.palata-nn.ru/activity/results/0/17).

112 The latest amendments to the Decree of the President on a procedure for the formation of public councils at the federal ministries were introduced on 20 May 2013. They are mostly of a procedural character; the councils were granted no greater power or influence.

113 Interview 6.

114 Interview 11.

115 E. Mamonova, ‘Sovetniki rabotajut za “korochki”. Struktura bolshinstva obshhestvennyh sovetov formalna’ (‘The Structure of most Public Councils is Formal’), Rossijskaja Gazeta, Moscow, 24 July 2012; V. Putin, ‘Demokratija i kachestvo gosudarstva’ (‘Democracy and the Quality of Government’), Kommersant, Moscow, 6 Feb. 2012.

116 ‘The Exit of WWF and Greenpeace from Public Council under the Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resources’, available at: http://www.wwf.ru/about/positions/sovet (in Russian).

117 See Postanovlenie Pravitelstva Rossijskoj Federatsii N 159 ot 22.02.2012 ‘Ob utverzhdenii Pravil provedeniya obshchestvennogo obsuzhdeniya proektov federalnyh konstitutsionnyh zakonov i federalnyh zakonov’ (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 159 of 22 Feb. 2012 ‘On approval of the Rules of the public discussion of draft federal constitutional laws and federal laws’).

118 Interviews 5 and 13.

119 Information on discussions about the Forest Policy of the Russian Federation is available at: http://www.wwf.ru/about/what_we_do/forests/forest_politics.

120 Interview 5.

121 ‘Citizens Call for Russia to Join the UN Environmental Convention in 2013’, posted on the Race for the Baltic blog on 2 July 2012, available at: http://raceforthebaltic.com/blog/?p=777.

122 See Federalnyj Zakon N 7-FZ ot 10.01.2002‘Ob Ohrane okruzhayushej sredy’ (Federal Law No. 7-FZ of 10 Jan. 2002 ‘On environmental protection’), Art. 12; Federalnyj zakon N 174-FZ ot 23.11.1995 ‘Ob jekologicheskoj ekspertize’ (Federal Law No. 174-FZ of 23 Nov. 1995 ‘On ecological expertise’).

123 Interviews 1, 6 and 11.

124 Tokunaga, n. 101 above, at p. 1700.

125 Another respondent reported that the state actively involved NGOs as expert partners in environmental planning processes. There are examples of successful engagement in drafting forest regulations regarding protection from fires. Regional ENGOs collaborate with a regional state agency in the water protection area and with education state bodies in the area of environmental education.

126 Interview 11.

127 Federalnyj zakon N 33-FZ ot 14.03.1995 ‘Ob osobo ohranyaemyh prirodnyh territoriyah’ (Federal Law No. 33-FZ of 14 Mar. 1995 ‘On specially protected natural areas’).

128 In recognition of this fact, Art. 5 of the Law on specially protected natural areas (ibid.) enables NGOs to assist the state authorities in the creation and operation of protected areas.

129 Interview 6.

130 Hochstetler, n. 3 above.

131 The state ecological expertise (environmental assessment) is mandatory for this activity under Federal Law No. 174-FZ, n. 122 above.

132 WWF, ‘“Gazprom” has Declared 2013 as the Year of Ecology on the Eve of the Anniversary of the Death of “Kolskaya”’, 12 Dec. 2012, available at: http://www.itar-tass.com/c9/603107.html (in Russian).

133 Human Rights Watch, ‘Russia: Environmental Activist Threatened with New Charges’, 21 Dec. 2012, available at: http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/12/20/russia-environmental-activist-threatened-new-charges.

134 Interview 16.

135 Interview 11.

136 Federalnyj Zakon N 18-ΦЗ ot 10.01.2006 ‘O vnesenii izmenenij v nekotorye normativnye akty Rossijskoj Federatsii’ (Federal Law No. 18-ΦЗ of 10 Jan. 2006 ‘On introducing amendments into certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation’); Federalnyj zakon N 121-FZ ot 20.07.2012 ‘O vnesenii izmenenij v nekotorye zakonodatelnye akty Rossijskoj Federacii po regulirovaniju deyatelnosti nekommercheskih organizatsij vypolnyaushih funktsii inostrannyh agentov’ (Federal Law No. 121-FZ of 20 July 2012 ‘On introducing amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation regarding the regulation of activities of non-commercial organizations performing the function of foreign agents’).

137 Rasporyazhenie Prezidenta RF N 115-rp ot 29.03.2013 goda ‘Ob obespechenii v 2013 godu gosudarstvennoj podderzhki nekommercheskih nepravitelstvennyh organizatsiy, realizuyushhih socialno znachimye proekty i uchastvuyushhih v razvitii institutov grazhdanskogo obshhestva’ (Presidential Decree No. 115-rp of 29 Mar. 2013 ‘On ensuring the 2013 state support for non-profit non-governmental organizations implementing social projects and participating in the development of civil society institutions’).

138 This usually includes providing free office space and access to telecommunications.

139 Interview 17.

140 Interviews 9 and 11.

141 Report on the State of Civil Society in the Russian Federation 2012 (Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation, 2013), at p. 17.

142 Interview 12.

143 C. Digges (trans.), ‘NGOs Issue Statement on the Bill Requiring Them to Register as “Foreign Agents”, Bellona, 10 July 2012, available at: http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2012/NGOs_statement.

144 Interview 1.

145 Interview 18.

146 Interview 6.

147 Interview 5.

148 Interviews 5, 6 and 11.

149 These forms and instructions are available at: http://minjust.ru/nko/otchetnost.

150 Information on the Bellona Foundation is available at: http://www.bellona.org.

151 ‘The President Demanded the Prosecutor General’s Office to Review the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Law on NGOs’, 9 July 2013, available at: http://www.itar-tass.com/c1/801307.html (in Russian); and Statement of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, 10 July 2013, available at http://genproc.gov.ru/smi/news/genproc/news-83567 (in Russian).

152 Greenpeace Russia, ‘Statement on the Recognition of Environmental Organizations “Foreign Agents”’, 30 Apr. 2013, available at: http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/ru/news/2013/30-04-Environmentalists_called_foreign_agents (in Russian); C. Digges, ‘Update: Raid on Bellona’s St Petersburg Offices Casts Uncertain Shadow over Organization’s Future’, Bellona, 20 Mar. 2013, available at: http://www.bellona.org/articles/articles_2013/bellona_ngo_raid.

153 Ibid.

154 Federal Law No. 7-FZ, n. 27 above, Art. 2, para. 6.

155 Interview 11.

156 In this study a broader meaning of ‘international ENGO’ is applied to a group of internationally recognized and influential ENGOs with offices in various countries and which do not depend on domestic funding. Examples of these NGOs are WWF Russia, Greenpeace Russia, and Bellona. These ENGOs may be registered with the Ministry of Justice as non-commercial organizations, as offices of foreign organizations, or national (domestic) organizations.

157 Crotty, n. 67 above, at p. 95.

158 Interview 18.

159 L. Smith-Spark, ‘Greenpeace Vigil for “Arctic 30” Held in Russia, as Dutch File Legal Case’, CNN International, 5 Oct. 2013, available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2013/10/05/world/europe/russia-greenpeace-netherlands.

160 Interview 6; Crotty, n. 67 above, at p. 91.

161 Interview 11.

162 Financial and in-kind support from larger NGOs usually included provision of premises, computers, communication and other facilities required for normal operation. Larger NGOs organize for local NGOs seminars on skills training, such as leadership, fundraising techniques, management and legal knowledge.

163 Yanitsky, O., ‘The Value Shift of the Russian Greens’ (2006) 15(2) International Review of Sociology/Revue Internationale de Sociologie, pp. 363–80.Google Scholar

164 Hemment, n. 67 above.

165 Interview 1.

166 Interviews 15 and 16.

167 For more effective influence in forming environmental policy, in some cases networking requires formal institutionalization in the form of associations of various NGOs. The Socio-Ecological Union (SEU) is an example of an association of different environmental NGOs, groups and movements. It was established in 1987 on the basis of the Druzhina movement to enhance the capacity of various environmental movements and groups united by a common mission – to maintain Earth’s diversity of nature and culture. This association is still active; it has international status and operates according to principles of horizontal networking, the equality of its members, and sharing of knowledge and resources.

168 Dvizhenie v zashitu Khimkinskogo lesa (the Khimkinsky Forest Movement) is a Russian ENGO based in Khimki, Moscow Region; see: http://www.ecmo.ru.

169 Hochstetler, n. 3 above, at p. 367.

170 Numerous attacks and threats by the police and arrests of activists were filmed and recorded by the activists and independent journalists; more information is available at: http://www.ecmo.ru/main/abuse_en.

171 One such NGO was Sherpa, a French non-profit legal organization that aims to protect and defend the victims of economic crimes: see: http://www.asso-sherpa.org. See also G. Tumanov, I. Buranov & A. Miklashevskaya, ‘The Highway from Moscow to St Petersburg was Brought to France’, Kommersant, 23 June 2013, available at: http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2219249?themeid=1209.

172 S.E. Mendelson, From Assistance to Engagement: A Model for a New Era in US–Russian Civil Society Relations (Center for Strategic and International Studies, 2009), at p. 2.

173 Federal Law N 7-FZ, n. 27 above, Art. 32 as amended in 2006 and 2012.

174 Interviews 9, 11 and 13.

175 Although not discussed in detail here, a final action included ecological and scientific expertise – participation in public environmental expertise, monitoring the state of nature, collaboration with scientists and research centres.

176 Interviews 1 and 6.

177 Interview 1.

178 Interview 6.

179 Holley, Gunningham & Shearing, n. 63 above, at p.176.

180 Holley, C. & Sinclair, D., ‘Deliberative Participation, Environmental Law and Collaborative Governance: Insights from Surface and Groundwater Studies’ (2013) 30(1) Environmental and Planning Law Journal, pp. 32–55 at 51–2.Google Scholar

181 The most recent reference on the MNR site to the work on ratification of the Convention was on 25 Nov. 2011, available at: http://www.mnr.gov.ru/news/detail.php?ID=127881&sphrase_id=326083.

182 Mol, n. 6 above, at p. 236.

183 One possible approach would be the provision of ‘block grants’: see D. Bayley & C. Shearing, ‘The Future of Policing’ (1996) 30(3) Law and Society Review, pp 585–606.

184 Rasporyazhenie Prezidenta RF N 216-rp ot 03.05.2012 ‘Ob obespechenii v 2012 godu gosudarstvennoj podderzhki nekommercheskih nepravitel’stvennyh organizacij, uchastvuyushhih v razvitii institutov grazhdanskogo obshhestva’ (Order of the President of the Russian Federation No. 216-rp of 3 May 2012 ‘On ensuring the 2012 state support for non-profit non-governmental organizations participating in the development of institutions of civil society’).

185 Interviews 9, 11 and 13.

186 Douma, W. & Mucklow, F. (eds), Environmental Finance and Socially Responsible Business in Russia (T.M.C Asser Press, 2009).Google Scholar

187 Nysten-Haarala & Kotilainen, n. 15 above, at p. 12.

188 See Statement by EU High Representative, Catherine Ashton, on the situation of NGOs in the Russian Federation, 26 Mar. 2013, 170/13, available at: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/136573.pdf; and the last meeting of G20 Civil Summit in 2013 where the issues of NGO legislation were raised by Russian and foreign participants, available at: http://civil20.org/newsg20/1655 and http://civil20.org/newsg20/1952.

189 Ibid.

190 Hochstetler, n. 3 above.

191 Dellas, Pattberg & Betsill, n. 4 above.

192 Braithwaite, n. 1, above.

193 Dellas, Pattberg & Betsill, n. 4 above.

194 Hochstetler, n. 3 above, at pp. 367–8.

195 Ibid.

196 Dellas, Pattberg & Betsill, n. 4 above, at p. 93; Hochstetler, n. 3 above, at pp. 364–9.

197 Hochstetler, n. 3 above, at p. 366.

198 Ibid., at p. 364.

199 Ibid., at p. 369.

200 Ibid.

201 Dellas, Pattberg & Betsill, n. 4 above, at p. 95.