Why is the eutrophication governance over the Lake of Baikal failing? Land use governance solutions need to account for barriers across sectors, scales, and actor groups

Bibliographic Data

ID11461122
AuthorsAnton Shkaruba (0000-0003-2536-2123, Estonian University of Life Sciences), Ruben Mnatsakanian (Central European University, corresponding author), Irina Molodikova (0000-0001-8926-9679, Central European University), Viktar Kireyeu (0000-0002-1895-7762), Kalev Sepp (0000-0002-8076-7943, Estonian University of Life Sciences)
Year2024
Volume141
Pages107136
Publication date2024-06-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLand Use Policy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0264-8377 • E-ISSN: 1873-5754
PublisherElsevier BV (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1016/j.landusepol.2024.107136
OpenAlexW4392868284
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited34

In this study, we examined the failure of Russia’s environmental governance to prevent the nutrient load generated by littoral households and tourism businesses from reaching Lake Baikal. It is important to note that this failure has occurred even with sufficient implementation capacity and demonstrable political will to protect this body of water. This research inquiry into the ‘eutrophication governance’ of Baikal was based on field analysis of management issues, institutions, and actors concerned with the island of Olkhon and was further ‘triangulated’ and completed using desk research targeting the broader institutional framework and actors’ discourses. On one hand, the study of the island’s socio-ecological system demonstrated that governance solutions developed by the Federal Government to curb Baikal’s eutrophication do not constitute a coherent set of measures targeting various stakeholder groups using an applicable repertoire of policy instruments. On the other hand, many local actors oppose the conservation agenda, and in doing so, they are actively making use of any gaps and inconsistencies in the eutrophication governance regime. This difference has resulted in a high level of conflict among key actors that is spreading across all policy levels. Successful solutions could be based on an inclusive and transparent policy elaboration aimed at resetting existing conservation tools to more acceptable ones with a parallel “ratcheting up” of enforcement and monitoring, which are grossly underpowered at the moment. This resetting process needs to be targeted by adequate capacity-building efforts. The greatest challenge, however, is to address the inconsistent and confusing signals regarding the protection of Baikal originating from high-level policies

Business · Civil engineering · Corporate governance · Economic geography · Economics · Environmental planning · Environmental resource management · Eutrophication · Geography · Land use · Natural resource economics · Arctic and Russian Policy Studies · Engineering · Environmental Science · Transboundary Water Resource Management · Water Resources and Management · Ecology · Finance

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access