Abstract
This chapter focuses on the issues of environmental rating as an indicator of geoecological risk (GER) management of Russian oil and gas companies in the Arctic. The authors discuss the need of using environmental rating for oil and gas industry in Russia. Primarily, specialized attention is given to the issues of rating results of Environmental Responsibility of Oil and Gas companies in Russia that was first held in 2014 by the cooperative initiative of CREON Group and WWF Russia along with National Rating Agency. The authors have selected and analyzed from all Russian oil and gas companies only those who are operating in the Arctic region.
The rating’s results show the “top three” companies among Russian oil and gas companies operating in the Arctic – Zarubezhneft, Lukoil, and Sakhalin Energy. There are also other companies being rated. For instance, Zarubezhneft and LUKOIL share the best position in terms of environmental management (the 1st and the 2nd position). The best companies in “environmental impact” sector are Gazprom, Zarubezhneft, and LUKOIL, whereas the leaders in “disclosure/transparency” sectors are Sakhalin Energy (Sakhalin-2) and Zarubezhneft (the 1st and the 2nd position).
In whole, the environmental rating of the Russian oil and gas companies, operating in the Arctic, may create a new mechanism of identification of their CSR level. Particularly, analysis of a number of criteria such as environmental management, environmental impact, and information disclosure or transparency helps correlate the process and results of economic activity of oil and gas companies in the Arctic with the requirements and expectations of society. Furthermore, the desire to increase these indicators contributes to investment attractiveness of oil and gas companies and testify about their environmental responsibility. It helps to inform foreign investors, and resulting in the rise of FDI in Russia as well as decline the geoecological risk (GER) in conditions of Arctic’s exploitation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bashkin, V. N. (2014). Biogeochemistry of polar ecosystems in the zones of influence of the gas industry (p. 302). Gazprom-VNIIGAZ.
Bigliani, R. (2013, May). Reducing risk in oil and gas operations. White paper. Sponsored by: EMC. IDC energy insights (p. 15).
Bratyushchenko, S. V., & Seliverstov, V. E. (2007). Corporate social responsibility as an institution of public-private partnership and efficient regional economic and social policy. Region: Economics and . Institute of Economics and Industrial Engineering of Siberian Branch of RAS, 4, 189–206.
Commodity cycles: Oil prices will fall in 2020. (2013). https://www.interfax.ru/business/327893. Accessed 04 Feb 2021.
Diagnostic analysis of the environmental status of the Russian Arctic (Advanced Summary). (2011). Editor-in-Chief: B.A. Morgunov, Moscow, Scientific World (p. 172).
Douma, W. T. (2010). The EBRD and Russia: Stimulating European principles for the environment. In W. T. Douma & F. M. Mucklow (Eds.), Environmental finance and responsible business in Russia: Legal and practical trends (pp. 169–188). T.M.C. Asser Press.
Environmental Management in Oil and Gas Exploration and Production. (1997). Joint E&P Forum/UNEP Technical Publication. An overview of issues and management approaches. Oxford, United Kingdom (p. 68).
Environmental Standards for Operations of Oil and Gas Companies Acting in Russia, on its Continental Shelf, and within its Exclusive Economic Zone developed by Russian Non-governmental Nature Conservation Organizations. (2005). (p. 8).
Freeman, R. E. (2004). Stakeholder theory of the modern corporation. In T. Donaldson, P. H. Werhane, & M. Cording (Eds.), Ethical issues in business (pp. 38–49). Prentice Hall.
Global and Russian Energy Outlook to 2040. (2014). Research advisor: A. A. Makarov, Project Manager: T. A. Mitrova, Professor L. M. Grigoryev. ERI RAS, ACRF (p. 175).
Improving safety and productivity in oil and gas operations. (2014). White Paper. Motorola solutions. (p. 14). URL: https://www.motorolasolutions.com/content/dam/msi/docs/en-xu/oil-and-gas/Oil_and_Gas_Safety_and_Productivity_White_Paper.pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2021.
Knizhnikov, A. Y., Pakhalov, A. M., Sipailova, Y., & Rodionov, K. (2015). Environmental responsibility rating of oil and gas companies in Russia (p. 22).
Konyshev, V. N., Sergunin, A. A., & Subbotin, S. V. (2017). State priority – Sustainable development of the Russian Arctic. National Interests: Priorities and Security, 3(348), 416–430.
Kumpula, T., Pajunen, A., Kaarlejärvi, E. M., Forbes, B. C., & Stammler, F. (2011). Land use and land cover change in Arctic Russia: Ecological and social implications of industrial development. Global Environmental Change, 21(2), 550–562.
Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended theoretical conceptualization. The Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.
RSPP. (2015). National register and library of non-financial reporting. URL: http://www.rspp.ru/simplepage/157. Accessed 22 Oct 2021.
Sergunin, A. A. (2021). Strategies of corporate social and environmental responsibility in the Russian Arctic: Theoretical aspects. Greater Eurasia: Development, security, cooperation. Yearbook. Issue 4, Part 1, 732–735.
Sharkey, A. J., & Bromley, P. (2015). Can ratings have indirect effects? Evidence from the organizational response to peers’ environmental ratings. American Sociological Review, 80, 63–91.
Shvarts, E. A., Kniznikov, A. Y., Pakhalov, A. M., & Sheresheva, М. Y. (2015). Assessment of environmental responsibility of oil and gas companies in Russia: The rating method. MSU Vestnik, Series 6, Economics, 5, 46–67.
Shvarts, E. A., Pakhalov, A. M., & Kniznikov, A. Y. (2016). Assessment of environmental responsibility of oil and gas companies in Russia: The rating method. Journal of Cleaner Production, 127, 143–151.
Stammler, F., & Peskov, V. (2008). Building a «culture of dialogue» among stakeholders in North-west Russian oil extraction. Europe-Asia Studies, 60(5), 831–849.
Trubitsina, O. P. (2016a). Biota monitoring in the impacted zones of oil and gas industry in the Arctic region. In V. N. Bashkin (Ed.) Biogeochemical technologies for managing environmental pollution in polar ecosystems (pp. 87–94).
Trubitsina, O. P. (2016b). Acid-alkaline features of precipitation in the coastal zone of the Arkhangelsk region: A retrospective analysis. Bulletin of the Northern (Arctic) Federal University. Series: Natural Sciences, 4, 17–25. https://doi.org/10.17238/issn2227-6572.2016.4.17
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2016). Analysis of geoecological risks and ratings as a factor of increasing the investment attractiveness of enterprises. Issues of Risk Analysis, 13(3), 76–83.
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2017a). Geoecology and geopolitic in the arctic region: Ecological and political risks and challenges. In V. Bashkin (Ed.), Ecological and biogeochemical cycling in impacted polar ecosystems (pp. 217–236). NOVA Science Publishers.
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2017b). Environmental ratings as a factor of improving investment attractiveness of Russian oil and gas companies, operating in the Arctic. In V. Bashkin (Ed.), Ecological and biogeochemical cycling in impacted polar ecosystems (pp. 275–292). NOVA Science Publishers.
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2018). Challenges of the activity of oil and gas industry facilities in the Arctic: Geoecological and geopolitical risks. Issues of Risk Analysis, 15(3), 66–76.
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2019a). Geoenvironmental risks on the background geopolitical challenges for the oil and gas industry in the Arctic. Neftegaz.ru, 4, 78–82.
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2019b). Environmental rating as an indicator of geoecological risk management of Russian oil and gas companies in the Arctic. Issues of Risk Analysis, 16(2), 58–69. https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2019-16-58-69
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2019c). Geoecological risk against the background of geopolitical challenges of the oil and gas industry in the Arctic. Issues of Risk Analysis, 16(4), 12–23. https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2019-16-4-12-23
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2019d). Taking into account geopolitical challenges in the analysis of environmental risks of oil and gas development of the Russian Arctic. Issues of Risk Analysis, 16(6), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2019-16-6-50-59
Trubitsina, O. P., & Bashkin, V. N. (2020). Dynamics of environmental responsibility of oil and gas industry facilities in the Russian Arctic: A rating approach for 2014–2019. Issues of Risk Analysis, 17(6), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.32686/1812-5220-2020-17-6-10-21
Wernstedt, K. (2002). Environmental Management in the Russian Federation: A next generation enigma (p. 37). Resources for the Future.
World Energy Outlook 2021. (2021). IEA. 386p. URL: https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/88dec0c7-3a11-4d3b-99dc-8323ebfb388b/WorldEnergyOutlook2021.pdf. Accessed 21 Oct 2021.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bashkin, V.N., Trubitsina, O.P. (2022). Environmental Rating as an Indicator of Geoecological Risk Management of Russian Oil and Gas Companies in the Arctic. In: Geoecological and Geopolitical Risks for the Oil and Gas Industry in the Arctic. Environmental Pollution, vol 29. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95910-4_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95910-4_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-95909-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-95910-4
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)