The latest issue of Developement and Transition was launched in November 2011, together with UNDP’s global human development report on “Sustainability and Equity”. The issue examines links between environmental sustainability and questions of equity and justice in the transition and developing economies of Europe and Central Asia.

If you think you have content which is relevant both thematically and regionally, send us an abstract (in English or Russian) to developmentandtransition(at)undp.org. If all goes well, we’ll ask you to write up the full article (1,000 words).

Particular topics that could be investigated include the following:

What is the region’s environmental footprint?Some observers have argued that unsustainable environmental practices and policies helped precipitate the collapse of the Soviet Union, and predetermined the unfavourable post-Soviet health and demographic trends apparent in the region. Others see the collapse of Soviet-era nature protection regimes (giving rise to poaching) and transition-era growth in consumerism as having caused irreparable biodiversity losses. Whereas some see the relatively low resource utilization levels and carbon emissions in the region’s low-income and lower middle-income countries as elements of sustainability that should be preserved, others see them as manifestations of poverty, to be relegated to the ash-heap of history by economic growth. What, really, do the data say about the region’s environmental footprint? How should these data be interpreted?

What does the region’s carbon profile look like? Trends in most countries’ greenhouse gas emissions during the past two decades fall into one of two categories. Most developing and some developed economies show monotonic increases in emissions during this time, tempered somewhat by the impact of recent high global energy prices, the global economic crisis in 2008-2009, energy conservation measures, and climate change mitigation efforts. On the other hand, greenhouse gas emissions from EU-15 countries, as well as from Switzerland and Norway, have essentially remained unchanged for two decades—reflecting large declines in emissions per dollar of GDP. Transition economies, by contrast, fall in neither of these categories. Most reported large declines in greenhouse gas emissions during the 1990s, due to the transition recession, sharp increases in relative prices for energy and raw materials, and the replacement of coal- by gas-fired boilers and power plants. Combined with the fact that many transition economies were not independent states when the Kyoto Protocol was drafted, these trends met that few if any countries in the region have faced binding targets on their greenhouse gas emissions.

However, these same data indicate that the world’s most carbon-intensive economies (in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per dollar of GDP produced) are to be found in the former Soviet space. Moreover, in some countries, progress made in the 1990s has been partially undone in the subsequent decade, in countries where resource-based economic recoveries have led to disproportionate increases in the shares of GDP produced by energy, and raw-materials, and energy intensive manufacturing sectors (e.g., metallurgy, petrochemicals). How then, does the region’s carbon profile look today? Which countries have made the most progress toward “decarbonisation”? Should the countries that have made the most progress be treated as models for those that have not? Should the region’s low-income and lower middle-income economies—some of which face serious national and household energy insecurities—refrain from development strategies based on fossil fuels?

Carbon production, consumption, and trade in the region: Although official greenhouse gas metrics measure emissions, growing numbers of specialists are calling for a re-examination of production-based measurement of contributions to global warming. If County A emits carbon in order to produce goods that are consumed in Country B, shouldn’t Country B bear at least some of the blame for these emissions? Or should Country A be punished for investing in carbon-intensive industries—for engaging in “carbon dumping”? These questions could be particularly relevant for the region: a recent report finds that—after China—Russia, Poland, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan (along with Australia) were the world’s largest “carbon exporters” in 2008.

Carbon finance and transition: Their relatively carbon-intensive economies affords many countries in the region opportunities to attract carbon finance, either under the Kyoto protocol, or (for the new EU member states and some accession countries) within the framework of the European Trading System’s (ETS) cap-and-trade regime. In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and helping to finance energy sector modernization, these flows can create green jobs. However, carbon finance inflows into the region to date have been below expectations. In the former Soviet Union, some governments have effectively chosen to remain outside the Kyoto framework, while others have been unable to create the regulatory framework needed to attract carbon finance. In the new member states, governments have often tilted the playing field to protect carbon-intensive domestic industries from the strictures of the ETS. What are the prospects for ramping up carbon finance flows into the region—particularly in light of the current and anticipated future evolution of the relevant global institutions (e.g., the climate investment funds, green climate fund)?

Sustainable production and consumption, and green jobs, in transition economies: The prevailing discourse on these topics often revolves around the world’s most developed economies, or rapidly growing developing economies like China and India, which are among the world’s largest waste emitters, and are often presented as competitors/challengers to the developed economies. The transposition of the “sustainable” and “green” concepts to lower-income developing and transition economies remains something of a rarity. How are concepts of transition toward sustainable environmental policies and practices most appropriately reconciled with transition toward market democracies? Which transition economies really are on the cutting edge of sustainability debates? To what extent production and consumption patterns become more sustainable because of economic transition? What shares of employment in these economies can be classified as “green jobs”?

Local governance and sustainability: While climate change mitigation must be nested in appropriate national policy frameworks, programmatic responses must inevitably reflect the specifics of regional economies and local ecosystems. In particular, climate change mitigation depends very much on decisions made by municipal and regional authorities regarding the development of public versus private transport, zoning and regulation of industrial, agricultural, and residential construction activities, and the like. Likewise for waste management. In some countries in the region, industrial and household recycling standards are approaching global best practices. In others, recycling remains one of the informal sector’s sadder dimensions, characterized by the unhealthy scavenging of trash bins and municipal waste dumps by desperate people without other livelihood options. While these differences can be explained in part by differing poverty levels, success or failure in decentralization and local governance also influence these outcomes. Whereas waste collection and disposal generally falls within the purview of municipalities, local authorities do not always possess the financial resources, control over local infrastructure, or institutional capacity needed to manage these tasks effectively—especially in small cities and towns, particularly in rural areas. What are the lessons of effective communal services and local governance reform within the region? Are they transferable? To what extent must tariff increases accompany efforts to more effectively address the environmental risks associated with waste management? Might higher waste management tariffs pose hardships for low-income households? If so, what might be appropriate policy responses?

Biofuels, commodity speculation, and food and fuel prices in the region: Russia and Kazakhstan are among the region’s largest producers and exporters of both food and energy (oil and gas). This makes them potentially important global players in biofuels—which implicitly force countries to choose between food and fuel production. It may also allow the prices of these countries’ key exports to be influenced (if not determined) by “speculation” in global commodity markets, rather than by underlying food and energy “fundamentals”. How are these issues playing out in Russia, Kazakhstan, and other important energy- and food-producing countries in the region?

Capacity for effective climate change mitigation and adaptation: How can it be assessed? Governments—but also companies and civil societies—face many challenges in designing and implementing policies and changing practices in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. How can institutional capacity for this response be assessed? Which countries in the region are best prepared for this response?

Energy, environment, and regional inequalities: Lessons from projects. Many energy and environment projects implemented by UNDP and other development agencies also address issues of regional disparities. Which projects have been most effective in this respect? What are the lessons learned from these projects