Challenging the Gospel of Neoliberalism? Civil Society Opposition to Mining in Armenia

Abstract

This article examines the introduction of neoliberal policies in the mining sector in Armenia and the civil society resistance that has emerged against those policies and practices. While recognising that neoliberal policies have global reach, I examine how neoliberal policies are locally translated, manifested, and resisted in Armenia and what factors shape resistance to neoliberal policies. I argue that the anti-mining activists have created new subjectivities and spaces for activism where they resist and challenge neoliberal policies and practices in the mining sector as well as the heretofore accepted formal practices of civil society advocacy and engagement in policy processes. Although the activists have not changed the way mining is practiced in Armenia, they have opened up debates around mining, and neoliberal policies more generally, and created new understandings and practices of civic activism and citizenship in Armenia.

Governing crop genetics in post-Soviet countries: lessons from the biodiversity hotspot Armenia

“…For the purposes of acquiring necessary technical equipment, attending trainings and, in effect being able to analyse genetic properties with up-to-date techniques, all gene banks rely heavily on foreign project funding. This is in line with Ishkaninan's finding regarding civil society in Armenia, that project-based support has 'turned democracy into a project and civil society into NGOs' (Ishkanian 2008), as government institutions rely on the same international project logic much in the same way as NGOs. In other words, the gene banks are not sufficiently funded by the government to perform their tasks.…”

“…The above-mentioned organisations are mostly involved in practical and community-oriented work, such as capacity building and seed distribution amongst farmers, rather than being involved in advocating policy changes in Armenia. So, while Armenian civil society is arguably diverse and has its share of environmental organisations (Ishkanian 2008;Ishkanian et al 2013;Skedsmo 2019), this case study finds that few organisations, if any, are occupied with PGRFA policies and advocacy.…”

“…Environmental governance is among the sectors that are heavily influenced by, and dependent on foreign funding (Skedsmo 2019). Generally, the sheer volume of western development interventions in Armenia has to some extent turned democracy into projects and civil society into NGOs (Ishkanian 2008). This study will examine whether and how legacies of state socialism (Chari and Verdery 2009) and Armenia's aid dependency are factors that may explain the status of PGRFA management in Armenia today.…”

“…Avagyan et al 2020). Various other relevant aspects of Armenia's environmental management are covered to a larger extent, documenting, for instance, forest policies (Sayadyan and Moreno-Sanchez 2006), citizens' participation in environmental decision-making and environmentalism (Ishkanian 2016;Skedsmo 2019), global environmental governance in Armenia (Skedsmo 2019) and Armenia's vulnerability to climate change as Armenia's agricultural sector is amongst the most vulnerable to climate change in the region (Ahouissoussi et al 2014). In general, the literature on post-Soviet countries' PGRFA management is scarce.…”

How states tighten control: a field theory perspective on journalism in contemporary Crimea

“…Since 2014, foreign grants have been delegitimized both in Russian official discourse, and among many study participants who continue to work in journalism in Crimea. Journalists I interviewed in Crimea spoke negatively of journalists they referred to as ‘grant‐eaters’ ( grantoedy ), a term used to denigrate journalists who would receive foreign grants for their media activities (this term has been used across the post‐Soviet space, in Armenia, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and in Ukraine: see, for example, Skibo ; Ishkanian : 116; Phillips : 70). The journalists I interviewed who remained in Crimea in the post‐2014 period engage in ‘othering’ the ‘grant‐eaters’, claiming they were paid to advance a pro‐Western agenda.…”