Search

Whereas the EU plays a leading role in the fight against global climactic change, the question of ratifying the Kyoto Protocol has stirred up a surprisingly intense public controversy in post-Soviet Russia. While scientists in industrialized countries are bringing pressure to bear on governments to make them adopt public policies for preventing global risks, the Russian Academy of Sciences is opposed to this. The reasons accounting for this Russian reaction are explained. The development of this controversy is examined from the viewpoint of several social actors persons, groups, institutions involved in it. Light is shed on how global and national issues interlock. The lines of cleavage and nature of the coalitions are described. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

On 1 May 2004, the European Union underwent its fifth "enlargement' as ten new countries joined. Integrating the eight new members from central and eastern Europe represents an economic challenge, especially in environmental matters. By joining the EU, these countries have had to accept the acquis communautaire and adopt environmental regulations stricter than those already existing there. This bears a price, since industry must be brought up to par with EU standards, in particular with regard to waste management and the installation of appropriate administrative structures. However the introduction of these standards also brings along considerable economic advantages, mainly related to the saving of natural resources, the improvement of productivity thanks to innovation and an increase in market openings; A comparison of the costs and benefits of applying EU environmental standards shows that, in the middle or long run, the benefits will exceed the initial costs. Porter's hypothesis, which emphasizes the advantages of environmental policies, turns out to be true under condition that these policies are integrated as early as possible in economic strategies and are backed up by a precise assessment of a country's environmental and economic conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After identifying legacies from the Soviet period that affect the current state of the environment, attention is turned to ecological problems in urban and rural areas. Institutional changes after 1990 and the socioeconomic aspects of environmental questions then come under analysis. The cleavage between urban and rural areas, which already existed under the USSR, has persisted. Lithuania's joining the EU will necessarily have an impact, at present and in the future, on the environment. This impact is evaluated despite the difficulty of assessing events still too near to us. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]