1. Environmental NGOs in Russia
Corporate Social Responsibility, local people and multilevel governance of natural resources in the Russian North

3. Strong and weak State in Russia
USSR- Centralized government, communist party the only decision making body
Perestroika– democratization from above (openness, freedom of speech)
Early 1990s –political instability, economic reforms
Putin 2000s-institutional turbulence, but again strong state. Putin - Medvedev- one dominant party government United Russia-”Party of thieves and cheaters”.

4. Environmental movement in the USSR
Political opportunities: Centralized government, communist party the only decision making body, secret military industrial complex, policy for separation on industrialized zones and protected areas
Environmental movement: in the 1960s –Nature Protection Core,
Professional societies, All Russia society for Nature Protection, sustainability initiatives

5. The author of Perestroika in Russia

6. Environmental movement since Perestroika 1987-89
Political opportunities: Perestroika, glasnost, opening to the world
Chernobil accident
Western money flow to build democracy
Flash of social movements, liberalization, against pollution, anti-nuclear
Social Ecological Union, many small and middle size NGO

7. Movement in the 1990s
Fast economic reforms, collapse of Soviet Union in 1991, political instability, reduction of western money flow
Multinational Corporations enter Russia
Massive NGO deaths, professionalization of NGOs, dependence on Western funding, mushrooming of environmental education initiatives
Offices of transnational NGOs established

8. De-institutionalization of the environment

9. NGOs in 2000s
Political opportunities in the context of institutional turbulence: Putin’s anti environmentalist restructuring: closed Goskomekologia, federal forest service, new forest and water codes, restructuring of the ministries, decision to import nuclear waste
Environmental movement: mass mobilization for the referendum, which failed, NIMBI against construction projects
NGOs funded by governmental programs, hardships with NGO registration, repressions (fire inspections, tax inspections)
Transboundary NGO projects, international co-management of natural resources

10. NGO cross border networks in forest protection
Mapping and assessment of virgin forests in Russia
Promoting forest certification and sustainable forest management
Creating specially protected areas (World Natural Heritage sites, National Parks, Zapovedniks, Zakazniks, Nature Monuments)
Campaigning and negotiation with western consumers, direct action

11. Foundations and networks
In the 1990s environmental NGOs started receiving foreign funding and integrated into transnational NGO networks
NGOs grew and diversified in Russia through the 1990s and early 2000s.
Environmental NGOs developed relationships with foreign foundations

12. Law on Foreign Agents 1938, US, Foreign Agents Registration Act FARA
13 July, 2012 enacted by the State Duma
21 November 2012-the law on foreign agents was implemented
NGOs which receive foreign money and do political activity have to register as foreign Agents
NGO resist registration
Prosecutor general
Many under the court

13. NGO-Foreign Agents
Putin 2014—the law on foreign agent—have to work!
654 NGOs –financed from abroad
Ministry of Justice can label NGOs as foreign agents even if they do not agree
More then150 NGOs were labeled, applied to the European Court of Justice, go through law suits in Russia

14. NGO-Foreign Agents Moscow Helsinki Group Memorial Golos (Voice)
All Gey and Lesbian Organizations
Gender Center in Saratov (for publishing the journal Social Policy)
Social Research Centers
22 Environmental organizations are listed

15. Environmental NGOs under the Law "On foreign agents”
Federal Law “On Foreign Agents”
2015-Law on undesirable orgaizations
How has the law “On Foreign Agents” influenced transnational environmental NGO networks in Russia?
What strategies have Russian environmental NGOs employed to operate under tightening state regulation?

17. How are environmental NGOs designated foreign agents?
Foreign funding
Political activity
Participation in seminars with state officials
Organizing environmental seminars and meetings
Participation by individual members of NGOs in public meetings
Appeals to state authorities
Publishing articles and interviews in the mass media, on web pages, or in academic journals
Criticizing government decisions
"I met a friend and he asked me, ‘Are you a foreign agent now?’ And I replied, ‘No, I'm an agent of Patriarch Kirill” (the head of NGO)
"Nobody will save you if you are active." (NGO expert)

18. Repressive State Regulation and NGO Strategies: Games with Formality
“Maximum formality”
Voluntarily entering the foreign agent registry
Rejecting foreign funding
Returning foreign funding
Pursuing judicial recourse
Liquidating the organization
“We are being forced to invent some new options to work in these conditions. We don't want to live like they force us to live. We should think of something that will help to avoid this situation” (Head of NGO).
“When there is a green light, we will go” (Head of NGO)

19. Repressive State Regulation and NGO Strategies: Games with Formality
“Informalization”
Rebranding
Diversifying the organization
Canceling foreign funding
Using informal partnerships with sympathetic organizations
“Verbal horse-trading” with regional Ministry of Justice
“We do not have to pay penalties. We are well known in the Ministry of Justice… We agreed that they would not request a penalty and we would not ask to pursue the case in courts” (NGO expert).

20. The transformation of environmental NGOs under the law on foreign agents
administrative and financial expense
less public and less active
increased negative attitudes toward NGOs in society
the restructuring of NGO networks
increased solidarity among NGOs
“Since we were labeled foreign agents, we have started to maintain silence because there could be some big penalty every time you speak” (Head of NGO).
“Some members had to leave organization because they worked in the state authorities or secure facilities... Some people stopped talking to us. It is understandable… Because of this ‘black mark’ people can be expelled from conversations and participation in urban life” (Head of NGO).

21. Effects of the transformation of NGO networks
Global-local interplay of actors changed
New rules of the game (globally/locally)
Changed networks with state officials and agencies within Russia
Games with formality
Negotiation through litigation
New transnational networks of civil rights defenders
Overall global-local institutional field changed for NGOs!

22. Major NGO networks Толя!
Я попрошу Вас подготовить презентацию для Е.А. на английском языке (из 17 делегаций на совещании будет только 2 русскоязычных - наша и казахская)
В ней надо:
отразить необходимость вовлечения гражданского общества в подготовку и реализацию решений FLEGT,
привести примеры того, как это делалось на предыдущих конференциях и как активно НПО участвуют в EU FLEGT,
рассказать, что прошло уже несколько заседаний с участием Лесного клуба НПО, на которых обсуждалась совместная позиция, далее - по тексту преамбулы к нашей позиции:
поддержка развития процесса FLEG в Европейско-Североазиатском регионе.
необходимость тщательной разработки плана выполнения решений Министерской конференции ENA FLEG.
план должен содержать реально выполнимые и эффективные меры,
необходимость полной открытости процесса, участии в выработке решений и возможности контроля выполнения решений со стороны природоохранных и иных неправительственных организаций и.т.д.
Необходимо привести самые важные, на наш взгляд, предложения для включения в Декларацию, в том числе конкретно и те, на которых настаивает Гринпис со ссылкой на них. Ну и наиболее важные с нашей точки зрения моменты отразить.
Спасибо!
ЭКОДАЛЬ

24. Two case studies at Kamchatka
IUCN-(International Union of Conservation of Nature)– developing non-wood resource business in Kamchatka
WWF- helping indigenous people, involving them in sustainable businesses (ecological tourism)

31. Case Studies
a) IUCN promotes sustainable non-wood resource businesses in Kamchatka oblast, settlement Esso
b) IUCN promotes sustainable non-wood resource business in Palana, Koryak Autonomus Okrug,
b) WWF promotes infrastructure for Nalichevo and Bistrinski parks;
c) WWF promotes building an Itelmen sustainable community in Koryak Autonomous Okrug very distant from Koryak Zapovednik

32. IUCN agenda
To develop sustainable business that will be environmentally friendly
To transfer best practice to the indigenous people, that they do sustainable business instead of illegal hunting and fishing
Connect with cultural revitalization and use indigenous knowledge
To foster international trade of sustainable products

33. IUCN case studies Esso Tourist infrastructure Many civic initiatives
Responsibility took an activist of the association of indigenous people
Elderly people were active
Fostering community involvement
Palana
No roads, no tourists
Few civic initiatives
Responsibility took a University professor
Weak link to the association of indigenous people

34. Outcomes of the project
Esso
Small group of elderly people started the business
Small office established
Several fairs of Fito Chai combined with community events
Learned marketing strategies, developed advertising broshures
Palana
Only those who received the grant participate
Transfer agenda to the publication project
Took “indigenous knowledge” from the ethnography books and PhD dissertations
Grant failed—returned money

35. WWF agenda Living planet effort
Develop eco-tourism in Nalichevo and Bistrinski, Kovran, eco-trails
Create an ecological refuge Tshanom (advise of Moscow ethnographer)-Brazil model
Involve local people in activities from which the protected areas will benefit

36. Outcome
Nalichevo park-eco-tourist trail build on the basis of a Soviet trail
No indigenous people participate in Nalichevo
Provide radio-stations for indigenous people in Bistrinsky
Tourism inflow improved, but it is more commercial then ecological
Tshanom
Ecological refuge designated, money provided by WWF
Governor reelected-refuge closed
Multiple law suits, WWF gone-project failed, but organizational learning took place