Ключевые слова

2304-3369

2308-8842

Вопросы управления

Management issues

10.22394/2304-3369-2023-3-72-89

JVYNBJ

КАЧЕСТВО РЕГИОНАЛЬНОЙ ПОЛИТИКИ В СФЕРЕ ОХРАНЫ ОКРУЖАЮЩЕЙ СРЕДЫ: ЭКОЛОГИЧЕСКОЕ УПРАВЛЕНИЕ В РЕГИОНАХ РОССИИ

QUALITY OF REGIONAL POLICY IN THE FIELD OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION: ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT IN THE RUSSIAN REGIONS

Турцева

Кристина Павловна

Турцева

Кристина Павловна

Turtseva

Christina P.

burdina.k@bk.ru

0000-0003-2109-7772

Пермский государственный национальный исследовательский университет (Пермь, Россия) Perm State National Research University (Perm, Russia)

01 01 2023

2023

17 3 72 89 03 03 2023 17 04 2023 31 03 2023

© Автор(ы) / The Author(s) 2023. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

2023

Автор(ы)

The Author(s)

CC BY-NC 4.0

Введение. Участие заинтересованных сторон становится все более значимым для достижения инклюзивности в экологическом управлении. В настоящее время правительства все чаще продвигают идею сотрудничества в государственном управлении для решения сложных экологических проблем. Исследование участия стейкхолдеров в региональном экологическом управлении представляет интерес для понимания факторов, оказывающих влияние на активность данного взаимодействия. Данная работа вносит свой вклад в исследование регионального экологического управления путем выявления влияния финансовой обеспеченности субъектов РФ в сфере охраны окружающей среды на широту представления и участия стейкхолдеров в экологическом управлении. Материалы и методы. Методами исследования выступают статистический анализ обработки данных – описательная статистика и сравнительный анализ экологического управления по предложенной автором методике в субъектах Российской Федерации, различающихся социально-экономическими показателями и расходами на охрану окружающей среды на материале сайтов региональных исполнительных природоохранных органов власти. Результаты. Проведенное исследование показало отсутствие четких различий в широте представления различных категорий заинтересованных сторон и направлений для сотрудничества при реализации экологического управления исходя из финансового обеспечения регионов, что свидетельствует о наличии других факторов, оказывающих влияние на интенсивность данного взаимодействия. Несмотря на это, было обнаружено, что у группы регионов с низкими природоохранными расходами, наблюдается чуть более активное взаимодействие с заинтересованными сторонами: задействовано большее количество направлений, форм сотрудничества и категорий стейкхолдеров. Это может быть связано как с инвестиционной привлекательностью данной группы регионов – реализацией огромного количества крупных инвестиционных проектов, так и дополнительными расходами на сотрудничество со стороны заинтересованных сторон. В результате ни один регион не получил максимального количества баллов по предложенной методике анализа качества экологического управления, что свидетельствует о существующих пробелах в управлении окружающей средой в рассмотренных регионах. Обсуждение. Сформированные на основе проведенного анализа предложения позволят региональным органам власти улучшить экологическое управление и более интенсивно работать с различными заинтересованными группами. Кроме того, предложенный автором анализ экологического управления с точки зрения финансирования и участия заинтересованных сторон в процессе принятия решений углубляет теоретические представления об особенностях реализации регионального экологического управления в современной России.

Introduction. Stakeholder participation is becoming increasingly prioritized for achieving inclusive environmental governance. Nowadays, policy-makers are increasingly promoting the idea of cooperation in public governance to solve complex environmental problems. The research of stakeholder participation in regional environmental management is of prime interest for understanding the factors influencing the intensity of this interaction. This work contributes to the study of environmental governance by identifying the impact of the financial security of the Russian regions in the field of environmental protection on the scope of stakeholders representation and participation in environmental governance. Materials and methods. The methods were statistical analysis of data processing - descriptive statistics and comparative analysis of environmental governance following the proposed by the author methodology in the Russian regions, which differ in socio-economic indicators and environmental expenditures based on the material of the websites of regional executive environmental authorities. Results. The study showed the absence of clear differences in the breadth of representation of various stakeholder categories and areas for cooperation in the implementation of environmental governance based on the financial provision of the regions, which indicates the presence of other factors affecting the intensity of this interaction. Despite this, it was found that the group of regions with low environmental costs has a slightly more active interaction with stakeholders: more areas, forms of cooperation and categories of stakeholders are involved. This may be due to the investment attractiveness of this group of regions - the implementation of a huge number of large investment projects, and additional costs for cooperation on the part of stakeholders. As a result, no region received the maximum number of points according to the proposed methodology for analyzing the quality of environmental governance, which indicates the existing gaps in environmental governance in the regions considered. Discussion. The proposals formed on the basis of the conducted analysis will allow regional authorities to improve environmental governance and work more intensively with various interested groups. In addition, the analysis of environmental governance proposed by the author in terms of financing and participation of stakeholders in the decision-making process deepens the theoretical understanding of the implementation specifics of regional environmental governance in modern Russia.

Ключевые слова региональная экологическая политика региональное экологическое управление качество экологического управления качество охраны окружающей среды стейкхолдеры регионы России

Keywords regional environmental policy regional environmental governance quality of environmental governance quality of environmental protection stakeholders Russian regions

1. LEMOS, M. C., & AGRAWAL, A. (2006). Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), 297–325. https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042605.135621.

2. LOOMIS, J. J., DE OLIVEIRA, C. M. R., & DZIEDZIC, M. (2021). Environmental federalism in EIA policy: A comparative case study of Paraná, Brazil and California, US. Environmental Science & Policy, 122, 75–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.03.015.

3. MILLIMET, D. L. (2014). Environmental federalism: A survey of the empirical literature. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 64(4), 1669. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2372540.

4. PAAVOLA, J. (2015). Multi-level environmental governance: Exploring the economic explanations. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(3), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1698.

5. REED, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.

6. RYDIN, Y., & PENNINGTON, M. (2000). Public participation and local environmental planning: The collective action problem and the potential of social capital. Local Environment, 5(2), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830050009328.

7. NEWIG, J., & FRITSCH, O. (2009). More Input –Better Output: Does Citizen Involvement Improve Environmental Governance?. In I. Blühdorn (Ed.) In Search of Legitimacy: Policy Making in Europe and the Challenge of Complexity (pp. 205–224). Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j. ctvhktkhn.15.

8. ГОЛОДОВА Ж. Г. Финансовый потенциал региона: сущность и элементы управления // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Экономика. 2010. № 4. С. 13–21. EDN MWPOZL.

9. ANGGRAENI, M., GUPTA, J., & VERREST, H. J. (2019). Cost and value of stakeholders participation: A systematic literature review. Environmental Science & Policy, 101, 364–373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.en- vsci.2019.07.012.

10. ADELLE, C., & WEILAND, S. (2012). Policy assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 25–33. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14615517.2012.663256.

11. MACDONALD, G., STARR, G., SCHOOLEY, M., YEE, S. L., KLIMOWSKI, K., & TURNER, K. (2001). Introduction to program evaluation for comprehensive tobacco con- trol programs. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1037/e309162004-001.

12. THEODOULOU, S. Z., & KOFINIS, C. (2004). The Art of the Game: Understanding Policy Making. Thomson Wadsworth.

13. AZAM, M., LIU, L., & AHMAD, N. (2020). Impact of institutional quality on environment and energy consumption: Evidence from developing world. Envi- ronment, Development and Sustainability, 23(2), 1646– 1667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00644-x.

14. ABREU, M., SOARES, I., & SILVA, S. (2022). Governance quality and environmental policy on emergent, resource-rich economies: The case of Brazil. Energy Reports, 8(3), 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.egyr.2022.01.041.

15. ROSE, M. (2009). The environmental impacts of offshore oil drilling. Technology Teacher, 68(5), 27–32.

16. MAVRAGANI, A., NIKOLAOU, I., & TSAGARAKIS, K. (2016). Open economy, institutional quality, and environmental performance: A macroeconomic approach. Sustainability, 8(7), 601. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/su8070601.

17. DENG, J., ZHANG, N., AHMAD, F., & DRAZ, M. U. (2019). Local government competition, environ- mental regulation intensity and regional innovation performance: An empirical investigation of chinese provinces. International Journal of Environmental Re- search and Public Health, 16(12), 2130. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ijerph16122130.

18. LIU, J., & XIE, J. (2020). Environmental regulation, technological innovation, and export com- petitiveness: An empirical study based on china's manufacturing industry. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1427. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041427.

19. GLASGOW, D., & ZHAO, S. (2016). Has the clean air interstate rule fulfilled its mission? An assessment of federal rule-making in preventing regional spillover pollution. Review of Policy Research, 34(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12225.

20. BIERMANN, F., & DINGWERTH, K. (2004). Global environmental change and the nation state. Global Environmental Politics, 4(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/ 10.1162/152638004773730185.

21. NAJAM, A., CHRISTOPOULOU, I., & MOOMAW, W. R. (2004). the emergent “system” of global environmen- tal governance. Global Environmental Politics, 4(4), 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2004.4.4.23.

22. ДОБРОЛЮБОВА Е. И. К вопросу о взаимосвязи качества государственного управления и человеческого развития // Вопросы государственного и муниципального управления. 2020. № 4. С. 31–58. EDN BRTRWO.

23. GISSELQUIST, R. M. (2014). Developing and evaluating governance indexes: 10 questions. Policy Studies, 35(5), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/01 442872.2014.946484.

24. BOVAIRD, T., & LOEFFLER, E. (2007). Assessing the quality of local governance: A case study of pub- lic services. Public Money and Management, 27(4), 293–300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9302.2007.00597.x.

25. РУСИН С. Н. Развитие государственного управления в области охраны окружающей среды // Lex Russica (Русский закон). 2016. № 6 (115). С. 82–90. EDN WYMHVN.

26. VIZEU PINHEIRO, M., ROJAS SÁNCHEZ, L., LONG, S., & PONCE, A. (2020). Environmental Governance Indicators for Latin America & the Caribbean. Inter- American Development Bank. https://doi.org/10. 18235/0002398.

27. KONDRATIUK-NIERODZIŃSKA, M. (2016). New knowledge generation capabilities and economic performance of Polish regions. Equilibrium, 11(3), 451–471. https://doi.org/10.12775/equil.2016.021.

28. ШКИПЕРОВА Г. Т., ДРУЖИНИН П. В. Оценка результативности политики в сфере обеспечения экологической безопасности регионов России // Экономический анализ: теория и практика. 2020. Т. 19, № 4 (499). С. 633–649. EDN WGOSTA.

29. PENG, B., LI, Y., WEI, G., & ELAHI, E. (2018). Temporal and spatial differentiations in environmental governance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(10), 2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15102242.

30. YANG, J., XUE, D., & HUANG, G. (2020). The changing factors affecting local environmental governance in China: Evidence from a study of prefec- ture-level cities in Guangdong Province. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), 3573. https://doi.org/10.3390/ ijerph17103573.

31. CHOW, J. K. F., & KENNEDY, K. J. (2012). Citizenship and governance in the Asian Region: In- sights from the international civic and citizenship education study. Public Organization Review, 12(3), 299–311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-012-0189-4.

32. DUAN, X., DAI, S., YANG, R., DUAN, Z., & TANG, Y. (2020). Environmental collaborative governance degree of government, corporation, and public. Sustainability, 12(3), 1138. https://doi.org/10.3390/ su12031138.

33. YANG, L., YUAN, S., & SUN, L. (2012). The relationships between economic growth and environ- mental pollution based on time series data? An empirical study of Zhejiang Province. Journal of Cambridge Studies, 7(1), 33–42. https://doi.org/ 10.17863/cam.1411.

34. CIALANI, C. (2007). Economic growth and environmental quality. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 18(5), 568–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777830710778328.

35. ЗЕМЦОВ С. П., КИДЯЕВА В. М., БАРИНОВА В. А., ЛАНЬШИНА Т. А. Экологическая эффективность и устойчивое развитие регионов России за двадцатилетие сырьевого роста // Экономическая политика. 2020. Т. 15, № 2. С. 18–47. EDN WUZPOS.

36. ТУРЦЕВА К. П. Векторы разработки региональной экологической политики в России: анализ государственных программ // Вестник Пермского университета. Политология. 2022. Т. 16, № 3. С. 27–40. EDN LYJGDO.

1. LEMOS, M. C., & AGRAWAL, A. (2006). Environmental governance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 31(1), 297–325. https://doi.org/ 10.1146/annurev.energy.31.042605.135621.

3. MILLIMET, D. L. (2014). Environmental federalism: A survey of the empirical literature. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 64(4), 1669. https:// doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2372540.

4. PAAVOLA, J. (2015). Multi-level environmental governance: Exploring the economic explanations. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26(3), 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1002/eet.1698.

5. REED, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature re- view. Biological Conservation, 141(10), 2417–2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2008.07.014.

7. NEWIG, J., & FRITSCH, O. (2009). More Input Better Output: Does Citizen Involvement Improve Environmental Governance?. In I. Blühdorn (Ed.) In Search of Legitimacy: Policy Making in Europe and the Challenge of Complexity (pp. 205–224). Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j. ctvhktkhn.15.

8. GOLODOVA, ZH. G. (2010). Financial potential of region: Essence and management elements. RUDN Journal of Economics, (4), 13–21. https://elibrary. ru/mwpozl.

10. ADELLE, C., & WEILAND, S. (2012). Policy assessment: The state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 30(1), 25–33. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14615517.2012.663256.

12. THEODOULOU, S. Z., & KOFINIS, C. (2004). The Art of the Game: Understanding Policy Making. Thomson Wadsworth.

13. AZAM, M., LIU, L., & AHMAD, N. (2020). Impact of institutional quality on environment and energy consumption: Evidence from developing world. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(2), 1646–1667. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00644-x.

15. ROSE, M. (2009). The environmental impacts of offshore oil drilling. Technology Teacher, 68(5), 27–32.

17. DENG, J., ZHANG, N., AHMAD, F., & DRAZ, M. U. (2019). Local government competition, enviromental regulation intensity and regional innovation performance: An empirical investigation of chinese provinces. International Journal of Environmental Re- search and Public Health, 16(12), 2130. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/ijerph16122130.

18. LIU, J., & XIE, J. (2020). Environmental regulation, technological innovation, and export competitiveness: An empirical study based on china's manufacturing industry. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1427. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041427.

20. BIERMANN, F., & DINGWERTH, K. (2004). Global environmental change and the nation state. Global Environmental Politics, 4(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/ 10.1162/152638004773730185.

22. DOBROLYUBOVA, E. I. (2020). In refernce to the correlation between governance quality and human development. Public Administration Issues, (4), 31–58. https://elibrary.ru/brtrwo.

23. GISSELQUIST, R. M. (2014). Developing and evaluating governance indexes: 10 questions. Policy Studies, 35(5), 513–531. https://doi.org/10.1080/01 442872.2014.946484.

25. RUSIN, S. N. (2016). Development of public ad- ministration in the field of environmental protection. Lex Russica,(6), 82–90. https://doi.org/10.17803/1729- 5920.2016.115.6.082-090.

27. KONDRATIUK-NIERODZIŃSKA, M. (2016). New knowledge generation capabilities and economic performance of Polish regions. Equilibrium, 11(3), 451–471. https://doi.org/10.12775/equil.2016.021.

28. SHKIPEROVA, G. T., & DRUZHININ, P. V. (2020). Evaluating the efficiency of the environmental security policy in the Russian regions. Economic Anal- ysis: Theory and Practice, 19(4), 633–649. https:// doi.org/10.24891/ea.19.4.633.

29. PENG, B., LI, Y., WEI, G., & ELAHI, E. (2018). Temporal and spatial differentiations in environ- mental governance. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(10), 2242. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15102242.

30. YANG, J., XUE, D., & HUANG, G. (2020). The changing factors affecting local environmental governance in China: Evidence from a study of prefecturеlevel cities in Guangdong Province. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(10), 3573. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103573.

34. CIALANI, C. (2007). Economic growth and environmental quality. Management of Environmen- tal Quality: An International Journal, 18(5), 568–577. https://doi.org/10.1108/14777830710778328.

35. ZEMTSOV, S. P., KIDYAEVA, V. M., BARINOVA, V. A., & LANSHINA, T. A. (2020). Ecological efficiency and sustainable regional development in Russia during the 20 years of resource-based growth. Economic Pol- icy, 15(2), 18–47. https://doi.org/10.18288/1994-5124-2020-2-18-47.

36. TURTSEVA, K. P. (2022). Vectors of the Russian regional environmental policy design: State programs analysis. Bulletin of Perm University. Political Science, 16(3), 27–40. https://doi.org/10.17072/2218- 1067-2022-3-27-40.