Regulatory Gap: Legal Uncertainty in the Context of the Population Status in Russia’s Climate Change Adaptation
https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2025-12-4-33-48
Abstract
This study examines the population’s legal status within the climate change adaptation frameworks in the Russian Federation. The research aims to identify and analyze the contradictions between the de facto central role of the population as the primary bearer of climate risks and its ambiguous, underrepresented position in the national regulatory system. Employing a qualitative analysis of Russian strategic documents and federal legislation, the study reveals a regulatory gap: the population is not officially recognized as the “climate-vulnerable object” (CVOs) of the national regulation. Consequently, the population is not guaranteed with legal protection, though it is officially considered a beneficiary of climate protection measures. The current Russian model of climate adaptation can be described as technocratic and infrastructure-focused, ignoring specific social vulnerabilities, limiting direct resilience measures, and creating systemic legal uncertainty. The findings highlight a significant misalignment between Russia’s current approach and internationally dominant, socially-oriented paradigms centered on human rights, vulnerability, and public participation. The article suggests key recommendations for legislative development, including the official recognition of the population’s status, methodologies for assessing social vulnerability and non-economic losses, and the implementation of direct, targeted adaptation measures to foster a humancentric model of climate resilience.
Keywords
population,
climate change adaptation,
vulnerability,
regulatory gap,
human rights-based approach,
Russia
Supporting agencies: This study was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation within the framework of the Carbon Measurement Test Area in Tyumen’ Region (FEWZ-2024-0016).
About the Authors
E. Gladun
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena Gladun – Carbon Measurement Test Areain Tyumen Region (FEWZ-2024-0016)
6 Volodarskogo St., Tyumen, 625003
O. V. Zakharova
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Olga V. Zakharova – Carbon Measurement Test Area in Tyumen Region (FEWZ-2024-0016),
6 Volodarskogo St., Tyumen, 625003
L. G. Suvorova
University of Tyumen
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Lyudmila G. Suvorova – Carbon Measurement Test Area in Tyumen Region (FEWZ-2024-0016)
6 Volodarskogo St., Tyumen, 625003
References
1. Barmina, A., Veselov, F., Alieva, A., & Verkeev, A. (2025). There are no natural disasters: Key approaches in social disaster studies. Laboratorium: Russian Review of Social Research, 17(1), 176–215. https://doi.org/10.53483/2078-1938-2025-17-1-176-215. (In Russian).
2. Boyakova, S. I., Filippova, V. V., & Vinokurova, L. I. (2023). Arctic uluses of Yakutia in the context of natural emergencies: Social challenges and experience of resistance. Safety Issues, 1, 19–31. (In Russian).
3. Burke, M., Hsiang, S. M., & Miguel, E. (2015). Global non-linear effect of temperature on economic production. Nature, 527(7577), 235–239. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature15725
4. Howland, F., & Le Coq, J. F. (2022). Disaster risk management, or adaptation to climate change? The elaboration of climate policies related to agriculture in Colombia. Geoforum, 131, 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2022.02.012
5. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2023). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability (contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844
6. Jodoin, S., Savaresi, A., & Wewerinke-Singh, M. (2021). Rights-based approaches to climate decision-making. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 52, 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.06.004
7. Kahn, M. E., Mohaddes, K., Ng, R. N., Pesaran, M. H., Raissi, M., & Yang, J. (2021). Long-term macroeconomic effects of climate change: A cross-country analysis. Energy Economics, 104, 105624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105624
8. Kravchuk, N. V. (2019). Protection of rights and public good in the context of climate change: Trends and threats. Social Sciences and Humanities. Social and Foreign Literature. Social Series 4: State and Law, 4, 106–114. (In Russian).
9. Ledeneva, V. Yu. (2021). Climate migration: Trends and forecasts. News of Southwestern State University. Series: Economics. Sociology. Management, 11(6), 233–242. (In Russian).
10. Lukianets, A. S., & Bragin, A. D. (2021). Assessment of the scale and prospects of the impact of climate risks on the socio-economic development of Russia. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 14(6), 197–209. (In Russian).
11. Marín-Puig, A., Ariza, E., & Casellas, A. (2022). Unattended gap in local adaptation plans: The quality of vulnerability knowledge in climate risk management. Climate Risk Management, 38, 100465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2022.100465
12. Nalau, J., & Verrall, B. (2021). Mapping the evolution and current trends in climate change adaptation science. Climate Risk Management, 32, 100290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2021.100290
13. Nand, M. M., Clissold, R., McNamara, K. E., & Yee, M. (2024). Guiding our responses to climate change by what people value: Insights from Fiji. Geoforum, 155, 104080. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2024.104080
14. Noskov, S. N., Buzinov, R. V., Siurin, S. A., Eremin, G. B., Karelin, A. O., Gudkov, A. B., Popova, O. N., & Nikanov, A. N. (2023). Modern concepts of the influence of terrestrial and space weather on human health (review). Journal of Biomedical Research, 11(2), 232–247. (In Russian).
15. O’Lear, S. (2024). The slow violence of climate security. Geoforum, 155, 104078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2024.104078
16. Parviainen, J., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Cumiskey, L., Bharwani, S., Schweizer, P.-J., Hofbauer, B., & Cubie, D. (2025). The Risk-Tandem Framework: An iterative framework for combining risk governance and knowledge co-production toward integrated disaster risk management and climate change adaptation. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 116, 105070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2024.105070
17. Pasovets, Yu. M. (2023). Socio-economic vulnerability of regional communities: Experience of sociological interpretation and measurement. Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast, 16(4), 236–253. (In Russian).
18. Pill, M. (2021). Linking solidarity funds and philanthropic giving to finance loss and damage from climate change related slow-onset events. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 50, 169–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.04.003
19. Porfirev, B. N., Aksenteeva, E. M., Eliseev, D. O., & Khlebnikova, E. I. (2024). Methodological approaches to assessing possible damage to economic systems from climate change. Forecasting Problems, 1(202), 67–80. https://doi.org/10.47711/0868-6351-202-67-80. (In Russian).
20. Pryazhnikova, O. N. (2024). Features of adaptation of social protection of the population to climate change. Economic and Social Problems of Russia, 1(57), 145– 157. https://doi.org/10.31249/espr/2024.01.09. (In Russian).
21. Schwerdtle, P. N., Devine, C., Guevara, M., Cornish, S., Christou, C., Wyns, A., Jungmann, M., Sauerborn, R., & Voûte, C. (2023). What cannot be mitigated or adapted to, will be suffered. Loss and damage in health and humanitarian terms. Journal of Climate Change and Health, 13, 100270. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joclim.2023.100270
22. Solntsev, A. M. (2020). Half-opening Pandora’s box: Review of the Human Rights Committee’s 2020 view on climate refugees. International Justice, 3(35), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.21128/2226-2059-2020-3-41-54
23. Turesson, K., Pettersson, A., de Goër de Herve, M., Gustavsson, J., Haas, J., Koivisto, J., Karagiorgos, K., & Nyberg, L. (2024). The human dimension of vulnerability: A scoping review of the Nordic literature on factors for social vulnerability to climate risks. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 100, 104190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2023.104190
24. van der Geest, K., & van den Berg, R. (2021). Slow-onset events: A review of the evidence from the IPCC Special Reports on Land, Oceans and Cryosphere. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 50, 109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2021.03.008
25. Walker, S. E., Smith, E. A., Bennett, N., Bannister, E., Narayana, A., Nuckols, T., Pineda Velez, K., Wrigley, J., & Bailey, K. M. (2024). Defining and conceptualizing equity and justice in climate adaptation. Global Environmental Change, 87, 102885. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102885
26. Zakharova, O., Karagulian, E., Viktorova, N., Gamukin, V., & Yablochkina, V. (2025). Risk assessment of socio-economic vulnerability to climate change: Case study of Tuymen Region. World, 6(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/world6010006
Review
For citations:
Gladun E., Zakharova O.V., Suvorova L.G. Regulatory Gap: Legal Uncertainty in the Context of the Population Status in Russia’s Climate Change Adaptation. BRICS Law Journal. 2025;12(4):33-48. https://doi.org/10.21684/2412-2343-2025-12-4-33-48
Views:
22
Email this article 