@inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Annexation of Crimea: Western Sanctions and Russia’s Response (2014–2021)}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_3}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_3}, abstractNote={This chapter centers on the sanctions levied against Russia following the Ukrainian crisis and the annexation of Crimea in 2014. It begins by examining the objectives behind these sanctions. The chapter scrutinizes how the sanctions evolved and intensified over time. The overarching aim of these sanctions was to impose enough economic damage on Russia to compel a significant shift in its foreign policy. Borozna and Kochtcheeva highlight Russia’s strategies to counter these sanctions, including state action, import substitution, forging stronger ties with non-Western sources of technology and capital, and fostering its strategic industries to fulfill domestic economic needs. The chapter underscores that the primary political objectives of sanctions have not been achieved. Russia did not alter its political trajectory, retained control of Crimea, and refrained from making unilateral concessions. The Russian political system remained predominantly cohesive, and Moscow avoided political isolation by deepening existing international connections and establishing new ones.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Assessing Sanctions Effectiveness}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_6}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_6}, abstractNote={In this chapter, Borozna and Kochtcheeva examine the effectiveness of the sanctions imposed on Russia. The assessment of the effectiveness of sanctions on Russia is based on three key parameters: impact on the Russian economy, achievement of stated political goals, and countermeasures and remedies used by Russia to withstand the impact of sanctions. The sanctions that were imposed on Russia in 2022 onward had a significantly broader scope than the sanctions imposed after 2014. However, they failed to achieve their primary political objective, which was to change Russia’s foreign policy direction. These sanctions did not deter Moscow’s commitment to continue its involvement in the conflict, and it appears unlikely that they will change this determination in the foreseeable future. The economic impact of the sanctions imposed after 2022 is multifaceted. Although the Russian economy did not collapse, there are indications that specific sectors, including aviation, automotive, and information technology, within Russia have experienced substantial declines. However, the support and cooperation of countries friendly to Russia played a critical role in Russia’s ability to withstand the impact of these sanctions.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Conclusion}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_8}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_8}, abstractNote={This chapter serves as the concluding chapter, summarizing the book’s key findings regarding the objectives and outcomes of sanctions and discussing the implications of these arguments for Russia’s future interactions with the international community. Borozna and Kochtcheeva underscore that Russia has developed adaptive strategies, which allowed Moscow to endure the sanctions and make Russia less vulnerable to their impact. This does not mean that sanctions have absolutely no effect; they undeniably cause economic hardships in the Russian economy. However, the primary political objectives of sanctions, which were aimed at changing Russia’s foreign policy direction, have not been achieved. These sanctions are anticipated to have long-lasting consequences, not only for Russia but also for broader international trade and international relations. One of the main achievements of Western sanctions on Russia was making Russia acknowledge its overreliance on the West. This pressure led Russia to recalibrate its development trajectory, emphasizing policies like import substitution and fostering domestic economic growth. The imposition of sanctions on Russia and the global response to these sanctions also made evident the increasing division of global geopolitics between the Western alliance, the Chinese-led block, and a third group of emerging countries that has yet to decide on a course of action.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{kochtcheeva_2024, title={Foreign Policy, National Interests, and Environmental Positioning: Russia's Post Paris Climate Change Actions, Discourse, and Engagement}, url={https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003468998-11}, DOI={10.4324/9781003468998-11}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024}, month={Apr} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Implications of Sanctions to the Rest of the World}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_7}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_7}, abstractNote={This chapter delves into the repercussions of sanctions on both the sender states and third parties. The impact of sanctions on sender states has not been extensively explored in the existing research. Borozna and Kochtcheeva argue that due to the deep integration of Russia’s economy into the global trade system, the effects of sanctions against Russia are reverberating worldwide. The initial signs of these consequences are already evident, with rising energy prices, the closure of businesses in Europe, and increased food shortages in various parts of the world. This demonstrates that the impact of sanctions is not confined to Russia alone but extends to the sender states and even to nations that were not directly involved in imposing the sanctions. These sanctions contribute to shifts in global politics and alliances, particularly in the context of Russia’s strategic partnerships with non-Western actors.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Introduction}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_1}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_1}, abstractNote={In this chapter, Borozna and Kochtcheeva demonstrate that the sanctions imposed on Russia following the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and the conflict in Ukraine in 2022 stand out due to their rapid implementation and extensive coverage, targeting various aspects of Russia’s economy and political establishment. What makes them unique is not only their swiftness and scope but also that for the first time in history, the most comprehensive sanctions were imposed on the largest country in the world, a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, and the world’s largest nuclear arsenal. The West pursued multiple goals in the imposition of sanctions on Russia. The leading goals were to change the country’s behavior, isolate it from the international economy and hinder Russia’s ability to obtain the capital and materials; contain and punish the country by significantly weakening Russia’s economy, depriving it of crucial technologies and markets, and curbing its ability to wage war. This unprecedented use of sanctions against a major global player reflects a shift in international politics and has far-reaching economic and geopolitical implications, impacting global diplomacy and energy markets.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Sanctions Busting: The Role of Various States in Russia’s Resistance to Sanctions}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_5}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_5}, abstractNote={This chapter delves into the concept of “sanctions busting” and explores the roles played by various countries in alleviating the impact of sanctions on Russia as a target nation. Borozna and Kochtcheeva demonstrate that despite strong support for sanctions from Western countries, a significant portion of the international community has chosen to maintain trade relationships with Russia and adopt a neutral stance in the ongoing situation. China, in particular, has been critical of sanctions and has offered political support to Moscow while expanding trade links. Furthermore, numerous European and Asian businesses have actively explored ways to circumvent sanctions, effectively providing Russia with restricted goods. This chapter sheds light on the complex dynamics of international relations in the context of sanctions and how various nations and businesses have responded to the sanctions’ regime targeting Russia.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={Sanctions: A Theoretical Review}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_2}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_2}, abstractNote={In this chapter, Borozna and Kochtcheeva present a comprehensive analysis of research on sanctions, covering their various types, objectives, and their effectiveness in influencing the foreign policy direction of the states they are imposed upon. The synthesis of empirical evidence strongly suggests that, in the realm of coercive diplomacy, economic sanctions are typically ineffective. Targeted nations frequently do not modify their foreign policy stances and tend to maintain their domestic political trajectories. Paradoxically, sanctions can sometimes produce negative consequences for the states imposing them. The research shows that due to the damage that sanctions inflict on the economies of the targeted states, countries subject to sanctions perceive them as a threat to their national security. The destructive effect on the economy of the targeted state is comparable to the destruction of the state economy during a military intervention. Additionally, the research in security studies reveals how states can frame discussions surrounding sanctions as matters of national security. This framing is a strategic tool that governments use to rally their populations to endure the hardships brought about by sanctions. This not only eases the burden on the targeted state but also contributes to the limited success of sanctions in terms of achieving their goals.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @inbook{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={The War in Ukraine: Avalanche of Western Sanctions and Russia’s Reaction}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_4}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1_4}, abstractNote={This chapter illustrates the substantial differences between Western sanctions imposed on Russia in 2022 and those from 2014 to 2021 concerning their objectives, scale, and impact. These new sanctions were designed to isolate Russia from the global economy and disrupt Moscow’s ability to access capital, materials, technology, and support for its ongoing conflict in Ukraine, with the hope that this suffering might lead to internal instability and eventually result in a change of government. By the end of the first year of Russia’s war in Ukraine, the sanctions turned into an avalanche that impacted major industries and sectors of the Russian economy. Borozna and Kochtcheeva also provide insights into the perspectives of Russian decision-makers, policy experts, and academics. They analyze Russia’s response to the sanctions, which involved adapting mechanisms and initiating plans for a new phase of economic development that puts more emphasis on sovereignty and fostering strategic partnerships with non-Western centers of power.}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @book{borozna_kochtcheeva_2024, title={War by Other Means}, url={https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-031-51370-1}, abstractNote={This book analyzes the aims of sanctions on Russia and assesses their effectiveness and develops several main arguments}, author={Borozna, Angela and Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2024} }
 @article{kalokoh_kochtcheeva_2022, title={Governing the artisanal gold mining sector in the Mano River Union: A comparative study of Liberia and Sierra Leone}, volume={3}, ISSN={["1099-1328"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.3643}, DOI={10.1002/jid.3643}, abstractNote={Abstract}, journal={JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Kalokoh, Amidu and Kochtcheeva, Lada V}, year={2022}, month={Mar} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2021, title={Foreign Policy, National Interests, and Environmental Positioning: Russia's Post Paris Climate Change Actions, Discourse, and Engagement}, volume={9}, ISSN={["1557-783X"]}, url={https://doi.org/10.1080/10758216.2021.1968912}, DOI={10.1080/10758216.2021.1968912}, abstractNote={ABSTRACT This article demonstrates that Russia’s climate positioning has been based on nuanced and powerful conceptions of national interests, international engagement, and Russia’s role in the world. Domestically, climate mitigation actions are driven by concerns of economic competitiveness, energy efficiency, and security interests. Internationally, Russia’s active participation is offset by inertia, disagreements, and ambivalence in adopting and implementing climate policy. Russia’s climate approach is a consequence of contradictions between the structure of the economy, domestic preferences, and an ambitious foreign policy, as Russian leaders seek to advance the country’s image as an assertive global actor in solving pressing world problems.}, journal={PROBLEMS OF POST-COMMUNISM}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V}, year={2021}, month={Sep} }
 @article{butorov_2020, title={Book review: Kochtcheeva, L.V. (2020). Russian Politics and Response to Globalization. London, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 250 p.}, DOI={10.22363/2313-0660-2020-20-3-638-640}, abstractNote={-}, journal={Vestnik RUDN. International Relations}, author={Butorov, Alexey Sergeevich}, year={2020} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Cultural Impact and Societal Responses}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_5}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Economic Engagement and Transformation}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_4}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb}, pages={133–182} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Political Reaction and Global Pressures}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_3}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb}, pages={81–132} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Russia at Crossroads}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_2}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb}, pages={31–80} }
 @book{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, ISBN={9783030391447 9783030391454}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4}, abstractNote={This book analyzes the nature of Russia’s involvement with globalization, highlights the problems and conflicts associated with political developments, and emphasizes Russia’s struggle to adjust to globalization as an external phenomenon in the context of domestic conditions}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={Russia’s Response to Globalization}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_6}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={The Forces of Globalization}, DOI={10.1007/978-3-030-39145-4_1}, journal={Russian Politics and Response to Globalization}, publisher={Springer International Publishing}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, month={Feb}, pages={1–29} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2020, title={The Implosion of Global Liberal World Order and Russian Foreign Policy: Dimensions, Tensions, and Prospects}, volume={20}, DOI={10.22363/2313-0660-2020-20-3-463-475}, abstractNote={The world faces a strategic challenge of reforming the governance basis of international politics, which is displaying the symptoms of significant destabilization, searching for new ways of crafting nuanced equilibria of interests and capacity at the global, regional, and domestic levels. Developing intricate and adaptable formulas to manage individual facets of international engagement is becoming increasingly complex and volatile. The effects of instability vary in different countries, but the global operational and political space is increasingly determined by problems within countries, where external stress becomes a result of domestic discrepancies, aggravating them and producing a set of contradictions. In the context of profound global transformations, what explains Russia’s status and positioning in the world? This article argues that as states are struggling to adapt to new realities and acquire capabilities in an effort to survive or gain more influence, Russia’s standing will depend on how adequately it can respond to the challenges and how effectively it will be able to use its advantages. Russia should not simply take in the results of global turbulence, but rather employ and actively develop areas of leadership and collaboration, by tying foreign policy firmly to the priorities of domestic development. While Russia conducts an active foreign policy consistently defending its interests and combining efforts to find optimal solutions to many contemporary problems, it has not yet arrived at a coherent security strategy or produced a vision of a future world order. The success may depend on understanding of the current trends, recognizing opportunities and demonstrating leadership, willingness to share in responsibility for results, as well as conducting essential domestic reforms.}, number={3}, journal={Vestnik RUDN. International Relations}, publisher={Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2020}, pages={463–475} }
 @misc{kochtcheeva_2018, title={Russian environmental politics: State, industry and policymaking}, volume={77}, number={3}, journal={Russian Review}, author={Kochtcheeva, L. V.}, year={2018}, pages={524–525} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2017, title={Environmental Disaster in the Post-Communist Countries: Is There a Solution?}, volume={4}, DOI={10.1017/s1466046602210157}, abstractNote={Abstract The breakdown of the Soviet Union revealed to the world that much of the expanse of the former communist bloc is an environmental disaster area. This paper shows that a switch to a free-market economy has failed so far to produce any significant improvements, and in the future is even likely to reinforce old threats and generate new ones. Thus, the argument states that short-term prospects for environmental restoration and instituting effective policies are rather unpromising where stabilization of both environment and economy is the primary goal and improvements are out of reach. The uncertainty of the process of economic and political reforms under way makes estimating the cost of future cleanup even more difficult. This paper demonstrates that countries in transition from totalitarianism to democracy attempt to build environmental regimes; however, this process is exceedingly slow, and in many cases, ineffective. Experience in mature environmental regimes suggests a number of ways that public trust and a level of accountability might be rebuilt where it has been eroded. Thus, this paper concludes that solutions fall into several general categories of activities, including building public trust through greater openness and access, developing more realistic laws, articulating more flexible and realistic enforcement techniques, and identifying alternative sources of financial support for environmental initiatives.}, number={1}, journal={Environmental Practice}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2017}, month={Mar}, pages={10–13} }
 @article{andonova_2013, title={Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia: Institutions, Flexible Instruments, and Governanceby Lada V. Kochtcheeva}, DOI={10.1002/j.1538-165x.2010.tb02096.x}, abstractNote={Journal Article Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia: Institutions, Flexible Instruments, and Governance by Lada V. Kochtcheeva Get access Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia: Institutions, Flexible Instruments, and Governanceby Lada V. Kochtcheeva. Albany, NY, State University of New York Press, 2009. 242pp. $75.00. Liliana B. Andonova Liliana B. Andonova Graduate Institute, Geneva Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Political Science Quarterly, Volume 125, Issue 4, Winter 2010, Pages 738–739, https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165X.2010.tb02096.x Published: 25 March 2013}, journal={Political Science Quarterly}, author={Andonova, Liliana B.}, year={2013}, month={Mar} }
 @misc{kochtcheeva_2012, title={Russia's encounter with globalization: Actors, processes, and critical moments}, volume={71}, number={3}, journal={Russian Review}, author={Kochtcheeva, L. V.}, year={2012}, pages={542–543} }
 @article{weinthal_2011, title={Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia: Institutions, Flexible Instruments, and Governance - By Lada V. Kochtcheeva; Environmental Justice and Sustainability in the Former Soviet Union - Edited by Julian Agyeman and Yelena Og}, DOI={10.1111/j.1541-1338.2011.00530.x}, abstractNote={Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia: Institutions, Flexible Instruments, and Governance . Albany, NY : State University of New York Press . 230 pages. ISBN 9780791476925 , $24.95 paperback . Kochtcheeva, Lada V. . 2009 . Environmental Justice and Sustainability in the Former Soviet Union . Cambridge, MA : MIT Press . 296 pages. ISBN 9780262512336 , $25.00 paperback . Julian Agyeman and Yelena Ogneva-Himmelberger ( Eds. ). 2009 . Two decades ago, the tearing down of the Berlin Wall followed by the Soviet Union's collapse transfixed the world community. These historic transformations ushered in a new era in which the main political and economic alternative to capitalist liberal democracies (i.e., state socialism) disappeared overnight. Up until then, the majority of research on the Soviet political and economic system was relegated to the stand-alone field of Soviet Studies. Owing to the Soviet Union's particular and distinctive political and economic system, scholarly work on environmental management shared the same fate and was rarely carried out in comparative perspective. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, scholars of the region have eagerly embraced a comparative and global perspective. Studies of political transitions, for instance, have situated the Soviet successor states' experiences within the broader literature on democratization (see e.g., Bunce, 2003). Similarly, research on the post-Soviet environment has examined the nature of transnational influences and financial flows on environmental protection in the successor states (see e.g., Darst, 2001; Weinthal, 2002). Grouping the two books under review here solely based upon a common regional affiliation is thus reminiscent of earlier days in which the region's political economy served as the primary starting point for analysis. Yet as it turns out, these two books emphasize divergence rather than convergence in policy paths for countries that ostensibly inherited similar institutions for environmental management. Where once the Soviet environmental policy process could be described as largely top-down and insulated from international pressures, these two books indicate that there are multiple influences on policy responses ranging from institutional intransigence and bureaucratic autonomy to transnational alliances. The challenge for these authors and their contributors has been to discern which factors matter most for political leaders and domestic activists to confront their environmental legacies bequeathed to them from the Soviet era, which include nuclear and industrial contamination and water and air pollution along with tackling new global environmental challenges such as climate change and biodiversity protection. Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia undertakes what would have been considered an improbable comparison of environmental policy instruments 20 years ago. During the Soviet period, the state was deemed the sole owner and protector of natural resources, whereas in the United States, multiple forms of ownership of natural resources, including both private and state, were commonplace. Having carried out a well-documented and detailed analysis of the environmental political process both in the United States and in Russia, Lada Kochtcheeva has produced a groundbreaking comparative piece of scholarship on the role of institutions and actors in the design and adoption of flexible incentive-based instruments for environmental protection. Through the lens of a historical institutionalist framework, Kochtcheeva traces the introduction of air and water quality policies over four decades. She finds that preexisting institutions both constrain and structure new policy choices for flexible instruments such as incentive-based programs, tradable permits, and pollution charges. Similar to others who have examined policy transitions away from state socialism and found that history matters (e.g., see Stark, 1992), Kochtcheeva discovers that the choice of policy instruments in Russia is very much dependent upon “continuity with the legal and regulatory traditions, the nature of environmental policy authority, the types of established regulations, and the capacity of government to ensure compliance with pollution control policies” (p. 1). What is striking is the level of similarities in environmental policy making in the United States and in Russia. Initially, both countries emphasized command and control approaches (e.g., direct regulation, standards, deadlines, and penalties), and later, both sought to introduce more cost-effective market-based tools in the air and water sectors. Ultimately, the United States was more successful at establishing and sustaining these flexible policy instruments because it possessed a “comprehensive, independent, and centralized agency” (p. 10). In contrast to the strong role of the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Russia's attempts to introduce such market-based policy instruments were constrained by the institutional legacy inherited from the Soviet Union owing to the absence of a single independent environmental agency compounded by the “fragmentation of administrative responsibilities and the constant bureaucratic reorganization” (p. 11). This constant restructuring is most evident in the discussion of the frequent changes to the agency charged with environmental protection: In 1988, the State Committee for Environmental Protection (Goskompriroda) was created; then in 1994, its status was elevated to a Ministry of Environmental Protection (Minpriroda), and then by 1996 demoted to the State Committee on Environment (Goskomekologiia), and ultimately abolished as an agency in 2000 when its functions were incorporated into the Ministry of Natural Resources. In short, Comparative Environmental Regulation sheds light on the policy continuity inherited from the Soviet Union. Yet because its focus is on state institutions and governance, it is less informative about the growing impact of domestic activists and international influences on environmental policy making following the Soviet Union's collapse. This, then, is where the second book under review comes into play. Environmental Justice and Sustainability in the Former Soviet Union is simply about societal actors and activism. The editors, Julian Agyeman and Yelena Ogneva-Himmelberger, are interested in evaluating activists' agendas according to whether they align with environmental justice or “brown” issues (i.e., antipollution, antipoverty, promoting affordable housing, and clean drinking water) or environmentally sustainable development or “green” issues (i.e., reductions in greenhouse gases and waste and biodiversity). To answer whether activists' agendas map along these divisions or have merged into a single “just sustainability” or “human security” agenda, the editors have assembled a collection of essays from a large number of disciplines, including political science, human ecology, geography, urban planning, and anthropology. The case material covers the Baltic countries, Russia, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. Environmental Justice calls into question the notion that the past constrains future policy choices. Rather, it demonstrates that societies—even within closed political systems—can find ways to engage in struggle and protest for justice. Thus, while the editors conclude that few organizations have managed to merge a green and brown agenda into a “middle-way just sustainability/human security approach,” (p. 9) they do find “the emergence of at least a justice-informed environmental discourse in the former Soviet Union, if not a full-fledged environmental justice or a just sustainability/human security agenda” (p. 9). Several of the chapters examine the profound gap that exists between environmental laws and regulations on paper and in practice. Donohoe's chapter, in particular, on Russia's laws regarding environmental protection and indigenous peoples' rights shows that it is not sufficient to just have what are seemingly progressive laws on the books. He argues that the legal environment's instability compounded by unequal access to information and the neglect of people's procedural rights means that these laws are largely ineffective in protecting indigenous minorities' rights and providing political opportunities for social mobilization. Given such legal constraints and policy makers' prioritization of natural resource exploitation over quality of life issues, many of the chapters skillfully highlight the ability of communities to nevertheless engage in struggles for social justice. In many cases, international factors, including international institutions and conventions, play a large role in influencing the form and scope of activism. Kate Watter's chapter on community justice in Kazakhstan points to the role of the 1998 Aarhus Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision Making, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters. Precisely because Kazakhstan ratified the Aarhus Convention, Watters argues that community activists in Berezovka, Kazakhstan were able to exert pressure on Karachaganak Petroleum Operating for failing to include the public in the decision-making process regarding activities at the Karachaganak field. Graybill's chapter on sustainability in Sakhalin, Russia and O'Lear's chapter on oil wealth and the environment in Azerbaijan also elucidate the ways in which transnational forces, including multinational-led hydrocarbon developments in the Sea of Okhotsk and Caspian Sea, respectively, influence socioeconomic and environmental change. While both the Russian and Azerbaijani governments have pushed for the energy sector to be the engine of economic growth, these chapters find that its benefits have not been equally distributed and instead have contributed to human insecurity. Yet according to O'Lear, the perception of environmental problems alone has not spearheaded activism geared toward environmental justice. Overall, the major strength of the book is its empirics and case material that draws upon exemplary fieldwork, including extensive surveys and interviews. Yet despite the rich case material, the chapters fail to engage in a dialogue with one another because the chapters do not adhere to a consistent definition of justice or sustainability. For example, O'Lear examines “environmental injustice as reflected in a systemic, uneven distribution of the benefits and costs of natural resources, and as perceived by the people affected” (p. 98). In her discussion of diamond mining in the Sakha Republic, Susan Crates merges human rights and justice. Dominic Stucker examines environmental justice in Tajikistan within the political economy of poverty. The many definitions of justice and sustainability, however, is not just a problem for the authors but also for the political actors seeking to introduce policies to improve societal well-being and better management of the natural resource sector. For example, Laura Henry found that President Putin interchangeably uses sustainable development and economic development in his speeches. Furthermore, Graybill found that not only different perceptions of sustainability exist among the local populations, multinational corporations, and government leaders in Russia, but also that different actors can galvanize certain definitions for political expediency. Indeed, because the Russian government could adopt the terminology of environmental injustice, it was able to easily wrest control of a majority interest in Sakhalin-2 for its state-owned gas company—Gazprom. In sum, despite my initial reluctance to group these two books together solely because of their focus on the Soviet successor states, reading them in tandem provides a richer understanding of the diverse developments in environmental policy and politics in the two decades after the Soviet Union's collapse in which both institutions and actors matter while also allowing us to view these processes in comparative perspective.}, journal={Review of Policy Research}, author={Weinthal, Erika}, year={2011}, month={Nov} }
 @article{henry_2010, title={Kochtcheeva, Lada V. 2009. Comparative Environmental Regulation in the United States and Russia. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.}, DOI={10.1162/glep.2010.10.1.162}, journal={Global Environmental Politics}, author={Henry, Laura A.}, year={2010}, month={Feb} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2010, title={Russia's Response to Globalization: Europeanization, Americanization and Self-Determination}, volume={4}, DOI={10.2202/1940-0004.1084}, abstractNote={While there is recognition that globalization affects societies in various ways and that local reactions to globalization may be unpredictable and unstable, the literature has not produced many focused analyses of the effects of globalization in particular countries. This article analyses Russia’s participation in the interconnected world and explores the possibility of Europeanization and Americanization in Russia’s domestic and foreign policies. The article also describes the trends in search for authentic Russian values and a model of development, a “third path.” It argues that Russia’s engagement with globalization is shaped by both endogenous factors, such as national interest and strategic calculations as well as external pressures and opportunities. In the domestic realm, Russia strives for political, economic, and social self-determination by constructing its own vision of strategic objectives and forms of cooperation in the world. Internationally, Russia continues to have a difficult relationship with the dominant international order, intertwining engagement with suspicion and openness with nationalism. Russia’s involvement with globalization fuses the proliferation of socio-economic reforms and global integration with only partial acceptance of neo-liberal forces as well as the assertion of its national spirit and sovereignty.}, number={2}, journal={New Global Studies}, publisher={Walter de Gruyter GmbH}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V}, year={2010}, month={Jan} }
 @article{kochtcheeva_2009, title={Administrative Discretion and Environmental Regulation: Agency Substantive Rules and Court Decisions in US Air and Water Quality Policies}, volume={26}, ISSN={["1541-132X"]}, DOI={10.1111/j.1541-1338.2009.00381.x}, abstractNote={Abstract}, number={3}, journal={REVIEW OF POLICY RESEARCH}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.}, year={2009}, month={May}, pages={241–265} }
 @article{singh_kochtcheeva_2009, title={An Ecosystem Approach to Human Health}, DOI={10.1201/9781420032130.ch64}, journal={Managing for Healthy Ecosystems}, publisher={CRC Press}, author={Singh, Ashbinbu and Kochtcheeva, Lada}, year={2009} }
 @book{comparative environmental regulation in the united states and russia: institutions, flexible instruments, and governance_2009, url={https://www.sunypress.edu/p-4735-comparative-environmental-regul.aspx}, journal={SUNY Press}, year={2009} }
 @article{kochtcheeva, title={Globalization and the environment}, DOI={10.4324/9780203799055.ch22}, journal={Routledge Handbook of Global Environmental Politics}, publisher={Routledge}, author={Kochtcheeva, Lada V.} }