2008
DOI: 10.1080/09557570802452789
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The climate regime and domestic politics: the case of Russia

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Bernstein and Cashore [11] likewise favor more attention to the issue of domestic influences of environmental regimes and broader international influences. Still, in spite of two decades of continuously evolving and widening international efforts to deal with climate change, attention to such perspectives has been modest [11][12][13][14][15][16].…”
Section: Domestic Politics Governmental Authority Structures and Intmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bernstein and Cashore [11] likewise favor more attention to the issue of domestic influences of environmental regimes and broader international influences. Still, in spite of two decades of continuously evolving and widening international efforts to deal with climate change, attention to such perspectives has been modest [11][12][13][14][15][16].…”
Section: Domestic Politics Governmental Authority Structures and Intmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Against this historical backdrop, Russian society has evolved a relatively passive engagement with a paternalistic government and, consequently, has not developed a strong civil society . For instance, when it came to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, the initiative was driven by the President rather than scientists, industrialists, or campaigners; and the focus was mostly on advancing Russia's geopolitical interests, regardless of other environmental or financial benefits …”
Section: Climate Change and Societymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…40 For instance, when it came to ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, the initiative was driven by the President rather than scientists, industrialists, or campaigners; and the focus was mostly on advancing Russia's geopolitical interests, regardless of other environmental or financial benefits. [70][71][72] It was not until the mid-2000s that the climate per se received more attention in Russia's broader policy circles, 71 this despite Russian scientists being involved in the activities of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change from its inception. Furthermore, interviews with the scientists suggest that they 'did not seem to play a role in deliberative processes leading to key decision-making moments', such as ratification of the Kyoto Protocol.…”
Section: Climate Change and Societymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The USSR was the second‐largest carbon emitter throughout its existence and Russia's GHG emissions are on the rise again, increasing by 10.7% between 1998 and 2010 (Ref , p. 3). The country has been decisive at times in shaping international climate negotiations—first with its ‘yes’ to the Kyoto Protocol in 2004, which allowed the agreement to enter into force; and, more recently, in 2010 with the firm ‘no’ to an extension of the Kyoto Protocol …”
Section: Russian Climate Politics—the Big Picturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The country has been decisive at times in shaping international climate negotiations-first with its 'yes' to the Kyoto Protocol in 2004, which allowed the agreement to enter into force; and, more recently, in 2010 with the firm 'no' to an extension of the Kyoto Protocol. [39][40][41][42][43][44] The climate policy field converges with two increasingly important and interrelated domestic discourses in Russia-modernization and energy efficiency. 38,41 Russia's energy intensity (the relationship between GDP and amount of energy used) is three times greater than in the EU and twice that of the United States (Refs 43, p. 4; [45][46][47].…”
Section: Russian Climate Politics-the Big Picturementioning
confidence: 99%