Power politics : national energy strategies of the nuclear newly independent states of Armenia, Lithuania and Ukraine : disertacija

Mokslo publikacijos / Scientific publications
Anglų kalba / English
Power politics: national energy strategies of the nuclear newly independent states of Armenia, Lithuania and Ukraine: disertacija
Awarding Body:
Publication Data:
Ann Arbor, 1999.
1 pdf (342 p.)
Daktaro disertacija (socialiniai mokslai) - 1999. Bibliografija. Reikšminiai žodžiai: Armėnija; Energetikos strategijos; Branduolinė energija; Ukraina (Ukraine); Armenia; Energy strategies; Lithuania; Nuclear energy; Power.
Energija. Energetika / Energy. Energetics.
Armenia; Energy strategies; Nuclear energy; Power.
Summary / Abstract:

ENThe successor states of Armenia, Lithuania and Ukraine arrived at independence facing extraordinary challenges in their energy sectors. Each state was a net importer, heavily dependent on cheap energy supplies, mostly from Russia. Each state also inherited a nuclear power complex over which it had not previously exercised full control. In the time period 1991–1996, each state attempted to impose coherence on the energy sector, selecting a new course for the pieces it had inherited from a much larger, highly integrated energy structure. Each state attempted to craft national energy policies in the midst of severe supply shocks and price shocks. Each state developed institutions to govern its nuclear power sector. The states' challenges were made even greater by the fact that they had few political or economic structures necessary for energy management, and sought to create those structures at the same time. This dissertation is a systematic, non-quantitative examination of how each state's energy policies developed during the 1991–1996 time period. The theoretical premise of the analysis (drawn from Statist realism) is that systemic variables - regional climate and energy vulnerability - provide the best explanations for the resulting energy policy decisions. The dependent variable is defined as creation and reform of energy institutions. The independent variables include domestic climate, regional climate, energy vulnerability and transnational assistance.All three states adopted rhetoric and legislation declaring energy a strategic sector. The evidence suggests that two of the states, Armenia and Lithuania, which faced tense regional climates and high levels of energy vulnerability, succeeded in actually treating energy strategically, approaching energy as a matter of national security or “high politics.” The third state, Ukraine, failed to do so. The evidence presented suggests that the systemic variables (regional climate and energy vulnerability) provided a more favorable environment for Ukraine, one in which the state attempted reform of the sector, but not as a concerted national security issue. [From the publication]

2022-01-28 14:19:50
Views: 2