IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v22y2022i1d10.1007_s10784-021-09548-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

International legal instruments for stimulating green building and construction business: Russian case study

Author

Listed:
  • Zhi-Jiang Liu

    (GuangXi Normal University)

  • Vera Snezhko

    (Russian State Agrarian University - Moscow Timiryazev Agricultural Academy)

  • Anastasia Kurilova

    (Togliatti State University)

Abstract

Green building is an innovative and socially significant element of enhancing environmental sustainability. The main idea behind the construction of green buildings is to increase the sustainability of the living environment, which is achieved by reducing the overall impact of buildings on the environment and human health. This undoubtedly important trend, entering into modern use and closely related to the concept of sustainable development, makes it necessary to determine what lies at the basis of its international legal regulation. The purpose of the study is to determine the place and role of international legal instruments for the formation of "green" construction and processes, related to it. The Aarhus Convention, as one of these instruments, provides dual protections for environmental and human rights, and its focus on public engagement provides a mechanism to ensure that governments are held accountable in their efforts to address the multifaceted challenges facing our world today. At the same time, the second one—the UN Global Compact—is the world's largest corporate social responsibility initiative and also directly affects the status of implementation of many modern instruments aimed at achieving sustainable development in national legal systems. Research question: What is the role of the UN Global Compact and the Aarhus Convention in stimulating green building in Russia at the present stage? Through the method of political and legal analysis used in the work, the study attempts to determine the role of the mentioned international regulatory legal acts in the field of environmental protection as a tool to stimulate green building. The study is based on the assumption that international environmental agreements have the necessary levers to influence green building, and their effective application is in the public interest. The study is based on the example of the Russian legal system in a comparative perspective. This paper discusses the impact of international instruments such as the Aarhus Convention and the United Nations Global Compact on promoting green building, the sustainable development of the construction industry and the relationship between sustainability and competitiveness when using green supply chain management (GSCM). The study gives reasons to say about the contradictory attitude of the Russian authorities to the initiative to join the Aarhus Convention, but at the same time confirms the interest of Russian business in adherence to the goals of the UN Global Compact; however, it demonstrates the fact that the issue of forming sustained commitment to the concept of green construction directly for the construction business at this stage is not among the top priorities. In this area, commitment to the principles of the UN Global Compact is in its infancy. In practical terms, the work is of interest both for business entities for assessing the commercial profitability of business processes and for policymakers in the field of adapting domestic legislative acts to international legislation and law enforcement practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhi-Jiang Liu & Vera Snezhko & Anastasia Kurilova, 2022. "International legal instruments for stimulating green building and construction business: Russian case study," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 157-175, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:22:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-021-09548-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09548-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-021-09548-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-021-09548-1?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jill A. Brown & Cynthia Clark & Anthony F. Buono, 2018. "The United Nations Global Compact: Engaging Implicit and Explicit CSR for Global Governance," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(4), pages 721-734, February.
    2. Yonglong Lu & Nebojsa Nakicenovic & Martin Visbeck & Anne-Sophie Stevance, 2015. "Policy: Five priorities for the UN Sustainable Development Goals," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 432-433, April.
    3. Suthep Nimsai & Chanin Yoopetch & Polin Lai, 2020. "Mapping the Knowledge Base of Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Bibliometric Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-21, September.
    4. Agnieszka Konys, 2019. "Green Supplier Selection Criteria: From a Literature Review to a Comprehensive Knowledge Base," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-41, August.
    5. Orzes, Guido & Moretto, Antonella Maria & Moro, Mattia & Rossi, Matteo & Sartor, Marco & Caniato, Federico & Nassimbeni, Guido, 2020. "The impact of the United Nations global compact on firm performance: A longitudinal analysis," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    6. Proskuryakova, Liliana N. & Ermolenko, Georgy V., 2019. "The future of Russia’s renewable energy sector: Trends, scenarios and policies," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 1670-1686.
    7. Chih-Hsuan Huang & Ian Lings & Amanda Beatson & Cindy Yunhsin Chou, 2018. "Promoting consumer environmental friendly purchase behaviour: a synthesized model from three short-term longitudinal studies in Australia," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 61(12), pages 2067-2093, October.
    8. Jon Skjærseth & Jørgen Wettestad, 2007. "Is EU enlargement bad for environmental policy? Confronting gloomy expectations with evidence," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 263-280, September.
    9. Elen Akopova & Assiya Nursapa & Ilyas Kuderin, 2018. "Current environmental problems in member states of the Eurasian Economic Union," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 529-539, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maira Bauer & Mariya Bulatenko & Natalia Shimshirt, 2022. "RETRACTED ARTICLE:Development of corporate investment funds as a tool to achieve the goals of international treaties in the field of climate change," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 119-138, March.
    2. Jennifer Martínez-Ferrero & Mehmet Eryilmaz & Nese Colakoglu, 2020. "How Does Board Gender Diversity Influence the Likelihood of Becoming a UN Global Compact Signatory? The Mediating Effect of the CSR Committee," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-19, May.
    3. Pin Li & Jinsuo Zhang, 2019. "Is China’s Energy Supply Sustainable? New Research Model Based on the Exponential Smoothing and GM(1,1) Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-30, January.
    4. Štěpánka Zemanová & Radka Druláková, 2020. "Mainstreaming Global Sustainable Development Goals through the UN Global Compact: The Case of Visegrad Countries," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-10, February.
    5. Xiao Xiao & Yue Cheng & Yuling Zhang, 2024. "Sustainable Innovation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry: An Analysis of the Impact of Policy Configuration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-23, March.
    6. Shannon L. Sibbald & Nicole Haggerty, 2019. "Integrating Business and Medical Pedagogy to Accomplish the Sustainable Development Goals," Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, , vol. 13(1), pages 92-101, March.
    7. Heleen Dreyer & Nadine Sonnenberg & Daleen Van der Merwe, 2022. "Transcending Linearity in Understanding Green Consumer Behaviour: A Social–Cognitive Framework for Behaviour Changes in an Emerging Economy Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-27, November.
    8. Alice Hengevoss, 2021. "Assessing the Impact of Nonprofit Organizations on Multi-Actor Global Governance Initiatives: The Case of the UN Global Compact," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-13, June.
    9. Giorgia Miotto & Marc Polo López & Josep Rom Rodríguez, 2019. "Gender Equality and UN Sustainable Development Goals: Priorities and Correlations in the Top Business Schools’ Communication and Legitimation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    10. Luca Coscieme & Caroline A. Ochieng & Charles Spillane & Ian Donohue, 2023. "Measuring policy coherence on global access to clean energy between European countries," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 28(5), pages 1-16, June.
    11. Iwona Bąk & Anna Spoz & Magdalena Zioło & Marek Dylewski, 2021. "Dynamic Analysis of the Similarity of Objects in Research on the Use of Renewable Energy Resources in European Union Countries," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-24, July.
    12. Stella D. Juventia & Sarah K. Jones & Marie-Angélique Laporte & Roseline Remans & Chiara Villani & Natalia Estrada-Carmona, 2020. "Text Mining National Commitments towards Agrobiodiversity Conservation and Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, January.
    13. Jahar Bhowmik & Raaj Kishore Biswas & Nurjahan Ananna, 2020. "Women’s education and coverage of skilled birth attendance: An assessment of Sustainable Development Goal 3.1 in the South and Southeast Asian Region," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, April.
    14. Svetlana Balashova & Svetlana Ratner & Konstantin Gomonov & Andrey Berezin, 2020. "Modeling Consumer and Industry Reaction to Renewable Support Schemes: Empirical Evidence from the USA and Applications for Russia," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 10(3), pages 158-167.
    15. Gulnara Balgimbekova & Roza Zhamiyeva & Abzal Serikbayev & Bulatbek Shnarbayev & Amanbek Mashabayev, 2022. "International legal aspects of countering environmental terrorism in the context of modern trends in radical environmentalism," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 621-636, September.
    16. Duarte, Rosa & Serrano, Ana, 2021. "Environmental analysis of structural and technological change in a context of trade expansion: Lessons from the EU enlargement," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    17. Astrid Kainzbauer & Parisa Rungruang & Philip Hallinger, 2021. "How Does Research on Sustainable Human Resource Management Contribute to Corporate Sustainability: A Document Co-Citation Analysis, 1982–2021," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, October.
    18. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    19. Teresa Ashe & Marianna Poberezhskaya, 2022. "Russian climate scepticism: an understudied case," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 1-20, June.
    20. Nariê Rinke Dias de Souza & Alexandre Souza & Mateus Ferreira Chagas & Thayse Aparecida Dourado Hernandes & Otávio Cavalett, 2022. "Addressing the contributions of electricity from biomass in Brazil in the context of the Sustainable Development Goals using life cycle assessment methods," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 980-995, June.

    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:spr:ieaple:v:22:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-021-09548-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.