IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/njopap/v8y2015i1p111-133n6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Participation of the Northern Indigenous Peoples in the Management of the Russian Arctic Territories and Its Legal Protection

Author

Listed:
  • Gladun Elena

    (Associate professor, Tyumen State University, Tyumen, Russia.)

  • Chebotarev Gennady

    (President, professor, Tyumen State University, Tyumen, Russia.)

Abstract

The paper is an overview of the participation of the northern indigenous peoples in the public management of the Arctic territories in Russia. Different forms of participation are described, and most attention is paid to the co-management of the governments and the indigenous peoples when their mutual aim is protecting the Arctic and its natural landscapes in the period of extensive industrial development.The principle objective of the paper is to analyze the international and national legal regulations and to show some effective legal mechanisms through which participation can be developed in Russia.The authors study definitions of participation, the main international principles of participation and give a deep analysis of the legislation of the Russian Federation, which provides the framework for indigenous participation. Much attention is paid to the legislation of the federative regions of Russia which are inhabited by the northern indigenous peoples. Mostly the authors study the example of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Area, the Arctic area of Russia with the biggest gas reserves, inhabited by the Nenets.The first conclusion made in the paper is that the Arctic countries must not only prioritize the exploitation of rich Arctic resources, but also be aware that the Arctic is primarily the home and the area of the traditional lifestyle and occupations of the northern indigenous peoples who have lived there for a long time. The northern indigenous peoples are interested in cooperation with the governments according to their traditional values and knowledge; they want to be involved in the decision-making process and management of their territories and resources.The second conclusion is that a patchwork of federal laws regulating indigenous issues in Russia does not grant any special rights that let the northern indigenous peoples participate in the decision-making process concerning the lands and resources in the Arctic areas. The federal government mostly implements the concept of paternalism but not the concept of participation. The federative regions in their regulations provide considerably more opportunities for participation. However, the regions are quite restricted by the federal legislation. The regulations are fragmentary on both the federal and the regional levels, there is no system of public authorities providing for consultation, cooperation, agreements and other forms of indigenous participation. Moreover, in Russia there is very little experience in the realization of the participation of the Arctic territories and resources.The third, and most important, conclusion is that participation in the management of the Arctic territories should become a new element of the Russian Arctic policy. From this perspective it is necessary to ratify and sign two international documents – Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention No. 169 and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples – and to incorporate the basic principles of participation into the Russian federal legislation. Also it is vital to establish a specialized federal body on indigenous issues with a special focus on the northern indigenous peoples. Lastly, the legal and administrative capabilities of regions and local authorities should be increased, and the regional and local bodies should be vested with the power to involve indigenous peoples in the management of the northern territories.

Suggested Citation

  • Gladun Elena & Chebotarev Gennady, 2015. "Participation of the Northern Indigenous Peoples in the Management of the Russian Arctic Territories and Its Legal Protection," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 8(1), pages 111-133, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:vrs:njopap:v:8:y:2015:i:1:p:111-133:n:6
    DOI: 10.1515/nispa-2015-0006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/nispa-2015-0006
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/nispa-2015-0006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pomeroy, Robert S & Berkes, Fikret, 1997. "Two to tango: The role of government in fisheries co-management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(5), pages 465-480, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gladun Elena, 2019. "Sustainable Development of the Russian Arctic: Legal Implications," NISPAcee Journal of Public Administration and Policy, Sciendo, vol. 12(2), pages 29-60, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ashley Peiffer & Michael Harte, 2023. "Development from a distance: Exploring an international non‐profit's interactions with communities during the COVID‐19 pandemic," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 35(6), pages 979-994, August.
    2. Hamilton-Hart, Natasha & Stringer, Christina, 2016. "Upgrading and exploitation in the fishing industry: Contributions of value chain analysis," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 166-171.
    3. Barbara Quimby & Arielle Levine, 2018. "Participation, Power, and Equity: Examining Three Key Social Dimensions of Fisheries Comanagement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    4. Stefanie Engel & Charles Palmer & Alexander Pfaff, 2013. "On the Endogeneity of Resource Co-management: Theory and Evidence from Indonesia," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 89(2), pages 308-329.
    5. Plummer, Ryan & Armitage, Derek, 2007. "A resilience-based framework for evaluating adaptive co-management: Linking ecology, economics and society in a complex world," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 62-74, February.
    6. Espectato, L.N., 2007. "Co-managing shared waters: a coastal governance experience of Western Visayas Region, Philippines," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 37462, April.
    7. Guanais, José Hugo Gondim & Medeiros, Rodrigo Pereira & McConney, Patrick A., 2015. "Designing a framework for addressing bycatch problems in Brazilian small-scale trawl fisheries," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 111-118.
    8. Katon, B.M. & Pomeroy, R.S. & Salamanca, A., 1997. "The Marine Conservation Project for San Salvador: a case study of fisheries co-management in the Philippines," Monographs, The WorldFish Center, number 12341, April.
    9. Kahui, Viktoria & Richards, Amanda C., 2014. "Lessons from resource management by indigenous Maori in New Zealand: Governing the ecosystems as a commons," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 1-7.
    10. Sundström, Aksel, 2016. "Corruption and Violations of Conservation Rules: A Survey Experiment with Resource Users," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 73-83.
    11. Robson, Mark & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "The development of government agency and stakeholder cooperation: A comparative study of two Local Citizens Committees' (LCCs) participation in forest management in Ontario, Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1113-1133, May.
    12. Deepananda, K.H.M. Ashoka & Amarasinghe, Upali S. & Jayasinghe-Mudalige, Udith K., 2015. "Indigenous knowledge in the beach seine fisheries in Sri Lanka: An indispensable factor in community-based fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 69-77.
    13. Nobuhle Ndhlovu & Osamu Saito & Riyanti Djalante & Nobuyuki Yagi, 2017. "Assessing the Sensitivity of Small-Scale Fishery Groups to Climate Change in Lake Kariba, Zimbabwe," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-18, November.
    14. Fischer, Anke & Wakjira, Dereje Tadesse & Weldesemaet, Yitbarek Tibebe & Ashenafi, Zelealem Tefera, 2014. "On the Interplay of Actors in the Co-Management of Natural Resources – A Dynamic Perspective," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 158-168.
    15. James L Anderson & Christopher M Anderson & Jingjie Chu & Jennifer Meredith & Frank Asche & Gil Sylvia & Martin D Smith & Dessy Anggraeni & Robert Arthur & Atle Guttormsen & Jessica K McCluney & Tim W, 2015. "The Fishery Performance Indicators: A Management Tool for Triple Bottom Line Outcomes," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    16. Kenrick W. Williams & Hsing-Sheng Tai, 2016. "A Multi-Tier Social-Ecological System Analysis of Protected Areas Co-Management in Belize," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, January.
    17. Purcell, S.W. & Lovatelli, A. & Pakoa, K., 2014. "Constraints and solutions for managing Pacific Island sea cucumber fisheries with an ecosystem approach," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 240-250.
    18. Heenan, Adel & Pomeroy, Robert & Bell, Johann & Munday, Philip L. & Cheung, William & Logan, Cheryl & Brainard, Russell & Yang Amri, Affendi & Aliño, Porfirio & Armada, Nygiel & David, Laura & Rivera-, 2015. "A climate-informed, ecosystem approach to fisheries management," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 182-192.
    19. Brewer, T.D. & Moon, K., 2015. "Towards a functional typology of small-scale fisheries co-management informed by stakeholder perceptions: A coral reef case study," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 48-56.
    20. Yamazaki, Satoshi & Resosudarmo, Budy & Girsang, Wardis & Hoshino, Eriko, 2015. "Intra- and inter-village conflict in rural coastal communites in Indonesia: the case of the Kei islands," Working Papers 2015-02, University of Tasmania, Tasmanian School of Business and Economics.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:vrs:njopap:v:8:y:2015:i:1:p:111-133:n:6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.