8 research outputs found
ENARECO A new Master study course on enviromental economics in Ukraine.Ideas, Objectives and
No full textA new study course "Environmental and natural resource economics" ENARECO: basic approach
No full textThe Principle of Common Heritage of Mankind as Basis for a World Ecological Constitution
No full textКонцептуальные принципы позиции Украины на международных форумах по окружающей среде и развитию
No full text Здійснено спробу попереднього, далеко неповного за фактажем, глибиною аналізу та масштабами, наукового осмислення позиції України на міжнародних форумах з проблем охорони довкілля і сталого розвитку. Поряд з фаховим обґрунтуванням конкретних інституційних положень сталого розвитку – необхідністю визнання ідеї Екологічної Конституції Землі з одночасним заснуванням Світової Екологічної Організації та екологізацією знань як фактора становлення зеленої економіки – порушено питання безвідповідального ставлення чиновників до використання наукових здобутків у цій сфері, що не сприяє піднесенню міжнародного іміджу України та утвердженню її геополітичної ролі у світі. Наголошується, що проблема сталого розвитку перебуває в центрі уваги Організації Об'єднаних Націй, починаючи з другої половини 80-х років ХХ ст. Вона досі залишається невирішеним ключовим завданням світової науки, господарської практики та національної і міжнародної політики. Таке завдання можна вирішити лише спільними зусиллями науки, влади і громадянського суспільства.The paper presents preliminary attempt of scientific comprehension for what is the position of Ukraine at international fora on issues of environment protection and sustainable development. This attempt is far from being complete by facts range, depth of analysis and scope. It focuses mainly on professional substantiation for specific institutional provisions of sustainable development, before all the need to recognize the idea of World Environmental Constitution while establishing the World Environmental Organization and greening of knowledge as a factor for formation of a green economy. Also the questions are raised squarely pertaining irresponsible attitude of officials to proper use of scientific achievements in this area, that does not improve the international image ofUkraineand does not make its geopolitical role in the world stronger. The author noted that the problem of sustainable development is the focus of United Nations since the second half of 80 s of last century. It remains so far unresolved key objective for the world science, business practices as well as for national and international policy. This tusk can be fulfilled only by joint efforts of science, governments and civil society.Осуществлена попытка предыдущего, далеко неполного по фактажу, глубине анализа и масштабам, научного осмысления позиции Украины на международных форумах по проблемам охраны окружающей среды и устойчивого развития. Рядом с профессиональным обоснованием конкретных институционных положений устойчивого развития – необходимостью признания идеи Экологической Конституции Земли с одновременным основанием Мировой Экологической Организации и экологизацией знаний как фактора становления зеленой экономики – затронуты вопросы безответственного отношения чиновников к использованию научных достижений в этой сфере, которая не способствует подъему международного имиджа Украины и утверждению ее геополитической роли в мире. Подчеркнуто, что проблема устойчивого развития находится в центре внимания Организации Объединенных Наций, начиная со второй половины 80-х годов ХХ века. Она до этого времени остается нерешенным ключевым заданием мировой науки, хозяйственной практики и национальной и международной политики. Такое задание можно решить лишь совместными усилиями науки, власти и гражданского общества
Multi-stakeholder collaboration in Russian and Swedish model forest initiatives : adaptive governance toward sustainable forest management?
No full textBuilding the adaptive capacity of interlinked social and ecological systems is assumed to
improve implementation of sustainable forest management (SFM) policies. One mechanism is collaborative
learning by continuous evaluation, communication, and transdisciplinary knowledge production. The
Model Forest (MF) concept, developed in Canada, is intended to encourage all dimensions of sustainable
development through collaboration among stakeholders of forest resources in a geographical area. Because
the MF approach encompasses both social and ecological systems, it can be seen as a process aimed at
improving adaptive capacity to deal with uncertainty and change. We analyzed multi-stakeholder
approaches used in four MF initiatives representing social–ecological systems with different governance
legacies and economic histories in the northwest of the Russian Federation (Komi MF and Pskov MF) and
in Sweden (Vilhelmina MF and the Foundation Säfsen Forests in the Bergslagen region). To describe the
motivations behind development of the initiative and the governance systems, we used qualitative openended
interviews and analyzed reports and official documents. The initial driving forces for establishing
new local governance arrangements were different in all four cases. All MFs were characterized by multilevel
and multi-sector collaboration. However, the distribution of power among stakeholders ranged from
clearly top down in the Russian Federation to largely bottom up in Sweden. All MF initiatives shared three
main challenges: (a) to develop governance arrangements that include representative actors and
stakeholders, (b) to combine top-down and bottom-up approaches to governance, and (c) to coordinate
different sectors’ modes of landscape governance. We conclude that, in principle, the MF concept is a
promising approach to multi-stakeholder collaboration. However, to understand the local and regional
dimensions of sustainability, and the level of adaptability of such multi-stakeholder collaboration initiatives,
empirical studies of outcomes are needed. To assess the adaptive capacity, the states and trends of economic,
ecological, social, and cultural dimensions in actual landscapes need to be linked to how the multistakeholder
collaboration develops and performs over the long term
State forest management reforms in three ex-Soviet republics
No full textIn the context of the radical changes that East European countries have recently gone through, it is of general interest to study what institutional and organisational setups for forest management were selected in the individual countries, and why. The purpose of this thesis is to examine what reforms took place in the State forest management of Ukraine, the Russian Federation and Latvia during their first decade of independence and the underlying reasons for these reforms. In order to analyse the underlying reasons for reforms, a number of explanatory models were formulated, mostly based on Public Choice theory and theories on institutional development. By testing these models - Interest Group Struggles, Political Necessity, Historical Experience, Path Dependency and Influence of Clientelism and Black Economy, on the forest sector reforms, the applicability of each model on each reform was evaluated. This way the most likely motives for the reforms could be described. The three countries of the study were selected because of observed divergence in forest sector reforms during the first decade of transition. The results show that all the explanatory models can be used to explain the reform process, but on individual reforms, one or two models usually lead to a more likely explanation of the process observed. Looking on individual models and beginning with Russia, some key reforms in the forest sector were initiated because they were part of the Government's general reform agenda. Such reforms, when they led to reforms in the forest sector, have here been labelled Political Necessities, implying that the major decisions generated outside of the sector. The main such reforms in Russia, originated from the decision to privatise forest industry but to keep forest State-owned. Most of the other reforms of the period were consequences of this general decision but additional understanding of them was shown to be provided by using the other models of the study. Interest group struggles, particularly between forest management and forest industry organisations, but also between different levels of Government, were intensive during the studied period, and many of the reforms studied were resulting compromises. The analyses demonstrate that the most fundamental Russian forest sector reforms during the studied period were mostly formed already in the end of the Soviet period or in the very first years of the Russian Federation. It can be questioned whether this was not premature. In Ukraine, the reform process in society as a whole slowed down considerably after only few years of independence and in many sectors, the transition to market economy was not complete. One can argue that the Ukraine State Forest Committee as an organisation was an example of this, given that it continued to control the majority of Ukraine’s forests, enjoyed a close-to monopoly on final fellings and came to control a large part of Ukraine’s forest industry. The processes that led to this situation were strongly influenced by Interest Group Struggles and Path Dependency. As for Latvia, most striking is the breech with the Soviet-era institutional set-up and thus also with Path Dependency. In a first phase of reform in 1990-1995, several similarities between Latvian and Russian reforms can be found, although the Latvian reforms went further as a result of massive forest restitution. In a second phase however, Latvia created a new institutional and organisational setup, more similar to the Scandinavian countries. The models that best explain Latvian forest sector reform are Political Necessity and Historic Experience, the latter because Latvian institutions from the period before World War II were frequently used as models for reform. By the end of the studied period, the main forest institutions and organisations demonstrated practically no resemblance to what had existed prior to 1990. In this respect, Latvia differed very clearly from Russia and Ukraine. The differences between Latvia as compared to Ukraine and Russia have many explanations, as demonstrated by application of the different models on the individual reforms. On a larger scale however, the differences appear tied to whether reforms emanated from within or outside the State forest management and State forest industry organisations. Latvian Government decisions in 1988-91 on land restitution to pre-war owners and its 1995 Concept of Public Administration Reform, strongly influenced reforms in the forest sector. Further, Latvian openness to international support in policy and institutional development, and the fact that a young generation took over leadership roles in the sector, were also important factors. Also, after 1997, views of other interested parties were systematically integrated in the Latvian reform process. In neither Russia nor Ukraine did forest privatisation take place. Forest policy, legislation and State forest management questions were during most of the studied period largely determined by the State forest management organisation, but under steady criticism from adjacent interests. This atmosphere fostered a marked conservatism. Such fundamental changes that many transition countries' forest sectors went through during the past two decades are highly unusual events, and it is important that the experiences are collected while still in the active memory of the people that participated. This kind of studies can be of help in future analyses of other countries' forest sectors. Particularly, it is the hope of the author that experience from the East European transition period reforms will be utilised in planning future forest sector reforms in other countries, notably in Western Europe
To sustainability in forestry: the Ukraine's case
No full text Keywords: forestry; sustainable development; economy-in-transition; the Ukraine; institutions; multi-functional forest use; timber rotation; afforestation programme; soil erosion; climate change; carbon sequestration; cost-benefit analysis; forest policy measures and instruments. The general idea of the study is to address the current process of establishing new economic relations in forestry-in-transition and assess opportunities for its sustainable development. The scientific value of the thesis derives from the elaboration of multidisciplinary knowledge and the enhancement of practical applicability in a transitional economy of the concept of sustainable forestry development. Taking as an example the forest sector of the Ukraine, the study draws on the state of affairs in forestry that is developing under changing economic conditions, examining failures and new incentives in economic and institutional reforms. The central objective of the study is to determine the appropriate forest policies and economic incentives to improve future output from Ukrainian forestry, while making the sector economically efficient, socially acceptable and environmentally friendly. The way of the forest sector towards sustainable development is explored by analysing the following sustainability criteria: economics of forest use; forests' contribution to soil protection and carbon sequestration; the institutional framework in forestry and the necessity of its transformation in line with the requirements of the transition economy. The major research questions are: how does the transition to a market economy affect the Ukraine's forestry and what are the opportunities for its sustainable development? The study provides insights into sustainable forestry development at national and regional levels. Given that the Ukraine is a sparsely wooded country and considering the economic, social and environmental role of forests, the programme of afforestation as a long-term strategy for sustainability is elaborated. The implementation of the programme could enhance economic and soil protective forest functions. The study also reveals how the expansion of forest cover in the Ukraine enables to moderate carbon emissions and what forests' contribution to climate change mitigation could be. Afforestation is seen as a key sustainable forest policy measure if the country receives credits when trees are planted for carbon sequestration, since the currency obtained from such a trade can be used for developing the forest sector, taking into account all other criteria of sustainability. The research incorporates knowledge from social sciences, forestry and environmental sciences. It follows the semi-qualitative route and applies quantitative models where they are available and relevant. The study employs regression analysis; cluster and factor analysis; simulation and optimisation modelling; and cost-benefit analysis. Special attention in the study is being given to the implementation mechanism and to managerial aspects of the Ukrainian forestry's development towards sustainability
