@phdthesis{Venevskaia2004,
  author    = {Venevskaia, Irina},
  title     = {Modeling of vegetation diversity and a national conservation planning: example of Russia},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-0001863},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2004},
  abstract  = {Die {\"u}bergreifende Zielsetzung meiner Studie ist eine Ausarbeitung quantitativer Methoden zur nationalen nationale Schutzplanung in {\"U}bereinstimmung mit dem internationalen Ansatz. Diese Zielsetzung erfordert eine L{\"o}sung der folgenden Probleme: 1) Wie l{\"a}sst sich Vegetationsvielfalt in grober Aufl{\"o}sung auf Basis abiotischen Faktoren einsch{\"a}tzen? 2) Wie ist der Ansatz 'globaler Hotspots' f{\"u}r die Eingrenzung nationaler Biodiversit{\"a}ts-Hotspots zu {\"u}bernehmen? 3) Wie erfolgt die Auswahl von quantitativen Schutzzielen unter Einbezug der Unterschiede nationaler Hotspots bei Umweltbedingungen und durch den Menschen Bedrohung? 4) Wie sieht der Entwurf eines großfl{\"a}chigen nationalen Naturschutzkonzepts aus, das die hierarchische Natur der Artenvielfalt reflektiert? Die Fallstudie f{\"u}r nationale Naturschutzplanung ist Russland. Die nachfolgenden theoretischen Schl{\"u}sse wurden gezogen: · Großr{\"a}umige Vegetationsdiversit{\"a}t ist weitgehend vorhersagbar durch klimabedingte latente W{\"a}rme f{\"u}r Verdunstung und topographische Landschaftsstruktur, beschrieben als H{\"o}hendifferenz. Das klimabasierte Modell reproduziert die beobachtete Artenanzahl von Gef{\"a}ßpflanzen f{\"u}r verschiedene Gebiete auf der Welt mit einem durchschnittlichen Fehler von 15\% · Nationale Biodiversit{\"a}ts-Hotspots k{\"o}nnen auf Grundlage biotischer oder abiotischer Daten kartographiert werden, indem als Korrektur f{\"u}r ein Land die quantitativen Kriterien f{\"u}r Planzenendemismus und Landnutzung des Ansatzes der 'globalen Hotspots' genutzt wird · Quantitative Naturschutzziele, die die Unterschiede zwischen nationalen Biodiversit{\"a}ts-Hotspots in Bezug auf Umweltbedingungen und der Bedrohung durch den Menschen miteinbeziehen, k{\"o}nnen mit nationalen Daten {\"u}ber Arten auf der Roten Liste gesetzt werden · Ein großr{\"a}umiger nationaler Naturschutzplan, der die hierarchische Natur der Artenvielfalt ber{\"u}cksichtigt, kann durch eine Kombination von abiotischer Methode im nationalen Bereich (Identifikation großr{\"a}umiger Hotspots) und biotischer Methode im regionalen Bereich (Datenanalyse der Arten auf der Roten Liste) entworfen werden},
  language  = {en}
}
@phdthesis{Boehme2011,
  author    = {B{\"o}hme, Dimo},
  title     = {EU-Russia energy relations: What chance for solutions? : A focus on the natural gas sector},
  publisher = {Universit{\"a}tsverlag Potsdam},
  address   = {Potsdam},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-120-2},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-50210},
  school      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  pages     = {xix, 322},
  year      = {2011},
  abstract  = {Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one's own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.},
  language  = {en}
}
@book{Boehme2013,
  author    = {B{\"o}hme, Dimo},
  title     = {EU-Russia energy relations: What chance for solutions? : A focus on the natural gas sector},
  isbn      = {978-3-86956-278-0},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-63022},
  publisher      = {Universit{\"a}t Potsdam},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Public debate about energy relations between the EU and Russia is distorted. These distortions present considerable obstacles to the development of true partnership. At the core of the conflict is a struggle for resource rents between energy producing, energy consuming and transit countries. Supposed secondary aspects, however, are also of great importance. They comprise of geopolitics, market access, economic development and state sovereignty. The European Union, having engaged in energy market liberalisation, faces a widening gap between declining domestic resources and continuously growing energy demand. Diverse interests inside the EU prevent the definition of a coherent and respected energy policy. Russia, for its part, is no longer willing to subsidise its neighbouring economies by cheap energy exports. The Russian government engages in assertive policies pursuing Russian interests. In so far, it opts for a different globalisation approach, refusing the role of mere energy exporter. In view of the intensifying struggle for global resources, Russia, with its large energy potential, appears to be a very favourable option for European energy supplies, if not the best one. However, several outcomes of the strategic game between the two partners can be imagined. Engaging in non-cooperative strategies will in the end leave all stakeholders worse-off. The European Union should therefore concentrate on securing its partnership with Russia instead of damaging it. Stable cooperation would need the acceptance that the partner may pursue his own goals, which might be different from one's own interests. The question is, how can a sustainable compromise be found? This thesis finds that a mix of continued dialogue, a tit for tat approach bolstered by an international institutional framework and increased integration efforts appears as a preferable solution.},
  language  = {en}
}