Send message to Author

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between environmental change, floods, and economic inequality in the mountainous region of Chitral, Pakistan, within the broader context of Central Eurasia. Using a political ecology framework, the study explores how environmental risks and social structures interact to shape vulnerability and disaster response in remote mountain communities. The research is based on fifteen semi structured interviews with NGO professionals working in disaster management and community development in Chitral, Pakistan.

The findings show that floods significantly affect livelihoods, infrastructure, and social stability, particularly among economically vulnerable households. Climate change, glacial melting, and extreme weather patterns are increasing environmental risks, while local communities rely on both traditional ecological knowledge and institutional support to cope with disasters. Observations of animal behavior, water changes, and community-based early warning practices illustrate the role of local environmental ideologies in shaping responses to environmental threats.

The paper argues that integrating local knowledge with institutional disaster management strategies is essential for building resilient and equitable environmental governance in Central Eurasian mountain regions

Send message to Authors

Abstract

Environmentalism and nationalism have long been seen as incompatible and antagonistic. Many studies have found the positive association between environmental concern and global or cosmopolitan identity. Indicatively, in the famous motto “Think globally, act locally” the national level of attachment is absent. Moreover, in a seminal work on contemporary environmental movements in Eastern Europe, Jane Dawson (1996) have found them to be a mere transitionary “surrogates” for national movements. In recent years, quantitative and qualitative studies have started to problematize the previously accepted belief in incompatibility of environmentalism and nationalism and found national identity as instrumental in promoting environmental concern and pro-environmental behavior. Instead of giving an ultimate answer to the question whether strong national feeling obstructs pro-environmental behavior, our qualitative study is based on over 40 semi-structured interviews and looks into how nationalism and environmentalism are connected to each other in the heads of those already committed to the environmental cause – eco-activists in Russia’s regions: Moscow, one oblast (Tyumen), and one ethnic republic (Ufa). Our informants elaborate on counterintuitive but locally meaningful links between nationalism to pro-environmental behavior. They find commonalities between two social actions by referring to “altruism,” “empathy,” “indivisibility of motherland” including “natural heritage”, “collective values,” “duties to social and natural environment” and “moral obligations and responsibility.” Positive sentiments towards Russia, that is Russian (territorial) nationalism, function as the most prominent form of place attachment along with local (urban) sense of place. Notably, regional (republican) sense of place is important in Bashkortostan for ethically Bashkir, Tatar, and Russian environmentalists alike but not elsewhere. Global attachment does not feature much in the narratives of Russian environmentalists anymore. Thus, the recent out-migration of prominent activists, demographic shift in Russian environmentalist community, and growing governmental support for GONGOs have all contributed to the emergence of “environmental patriotism” as a prominent ecological discourse in diverse Russian regions.

Send message to Authors

Abstract

Energy transitions are shaped not only by a country's economic and energy environments but also by persistent narratives about possibility, affordability, and political feasibility. Across contexts, persistent energy myths shape how societies imagine, contest, and implement change. This paper develops a conceptual framework for understanding energy myths as forms of discursive governance that shape energy transition pathways in resource-dependent states. Drawing on insights from political economy, energy justice, and policy process theory, we define energy myths as persistent claims that structure decision-making despite incomplete or contested evidence. We then organise these myths into a systematic typology spanning technical, economic, infrastructural, social, technological, and environmental domains. Using evidence from discourse analysis, elite interviews, and government speeches, we identify recurring narratives that constrain action in Kazakhstan, including the beliefs that fossil fuels are indispensable, that renewables are inherently unaffordable, and that technological solutions alone can deliver decarbonisation.

By situating Kazakhstan within broader theoretical debates on energy justice and political economy, the paper argues that myths function as forms of discursive governance. They legitimise existing power structures, shape investment priorities, and limit the agency of local actors. These dynamics help explain why transition policies in resource-dependent states often remain centralised, incremental, and unevenly distributed. The findings suggest that energy myths function as mechanisms of delay and path dependency, legitimising incrementalism while masking deeper political and institutional constraints. By systematically examining how these narratives shape energy governance, the study contributes to broader debates on the political economy of decarbonization and highlights the importance of addressing discursive barriers alongside technological and financial challenges in energy transitions.

Send message to Author

Abstract

This paper examines how discourses of justice are constructed, negotiated, and mobilised during periods of political change. The study employs a comparative relational approach to how cultural policymaking practices are discussed, delivered, and implemented in two cities — Almaty, Kazakhstan, and Tbilisi, Georgia. It follows the critique of the relevance of the post-Soviet framework for understanding contemporary socio-cultural and political developments in these sites, and brings together justice studies, comparative urban research, and policy mobilities scholarship to investigate which regional frameworks matter when cultural policymaking in two contrasting regional contexts is approached through a justice lens. The study draws on semi-structured expert interviews conducted during four field trips in 2024–2025 and policy analysis. The interviews involved experts from the cultural sector and policymaking field. Interviewees included state and non-state cultural practitioners, former and current officials working on strategic documents for the cultural sector, representatives of international cultural organisations working in Kazakhstan and Georgia, and local and European specialists (journalists, researchers, analysts) working in the Kazakhstani and Georgian cultural sectors over the past decade. The paper explores how culture, often treated as a depoliticised domain, becomes a fruitful field for tracing practices of navigating the constraints of authoritarian governance, exploring foreign policy orientations, and analysing the localisation of international justice vocabulary. The paper explores the complex rationale behind the regional framings mobilised in the processes of cultural policy making and enactment, challenging the relevance of the recently dominant and still persistent post-Soviet framework in the social sciences. It argues that justice discourses within the cultural sectors of Georgia and Kazakhstan are defined by nation-building strategies and resulting developments in foreign policy, alongside the contrasting local specifics of everyday governance practices that differ from site to site. The paper further elaborates on how justice in cultural policymaking can be explored through a multi-scalar approach attentive to shifting regional framings, strategic geopolitical alliances, and the differentiated ways authoritarian contexts shape policy discourse and practice. The study situates the findings amid wider debates on productive collaboration between area studies and geographic research by bridging regional scholarship and empirical findings with political-geographical research on justice.

Send message to Authors

Abstract

This project examines Central Asian cooperation on transboundary water governance through the lens of water diplomacy and political communication. Shared river basins, particularly the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, remain vital for agriculture, energy production, and human security across Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Yet competing national priorities, climate change, glacier melt, and growing water demand continue to strain regional coordination.

The central argument of this study is that Central Asian water cooperation should be analysed not merely as a technical or hydrological matter, but as a negotiated diplomatic process in which communicative practices, media visibility, and stakeholder perceptions shape political outcomes. Drawing on water diplomacy theory (Islam & Susskind 2012; Wolf 2007), framing and agenda-setting approaches (Entman 2007; Iyengar 1987), and image and perception theories (Holsti 1970; Hermann 1995; Soroka 2015), the paper conceptualizes water governance as a multidimensional arena of negotiation embedded in both formal diplomacy and public discourse.

Empirically, the study applies a qualitative and quantitative comparative design. It combines document analysis of main agreements, semi-structured interviews with regional expert stakeholders conducted during the Regional Environment Summit (Astana, April 2026), and media content analysis in Kazakhstan (Kazinform.kz), Kyrgyzstan (24.kg), Tajikistan (Asiaplustj.info), Turkmenistan (Turkmenportal.com) and Uzbekistan (Kun.uz) from the period of the first Consultative meeting of Central Asian states in 2018 to 2025. The analysis integrates political discourse in regional documents with qualitative insights from experts and quantitative assessment of local media framing.

Preliminary findings suggest that while water diplomacy is emerging as a constructive mechanism capable of accelerating regional cooperation, its public visibility remains limited due to the local media bias predominantly framed within official, top-down narratives reflecting governmental positions. This controlled communicative environment constrains broader societal engagement and reduces public awareness of transboundary water governance processes. At the same time, interviews reveal the process is also seen as strategically blurred, lacking a clearly articulated and consistently communicated regional water policy identity.

These findings contribute to the literature on international environmental governance by demonstrating that the effectiveness and legitimacy of transboundary water cooperation depend not only on institutional design and resource allocation, but also on communication structures and perception dynamics. By bridging political science, communication studies, and environmental diplomacy, the project underscores that successful water diplomacy in Central Asia requires both negotiated institutional mechanisms and enhanced public visibility to foster trust, awareness, and long-term sustainability.