Publication Name

Environment and Security

headcount in Kazakhstan’s Jambyl province,

which has the lowest regional product per

capita (Pomfret 2006; ILO 2004). At the same

time, in Mangystau in 2003, three out of five

people were poor in rural areas, compared

with only one in five in urban areas (Chu-

lanova, 2007: 18). The differences in income

distribution between urban and rural areas

have significantly increased since independ-

ence

although the underprivileged can ob-

tain some social assistance and partly com-

pensate the differences in revenues.

A recent survey of the coastal regions of Ka-

zakhstan (CEP 2004 c; CEP 2004 d; CEP

2006 b; UNDP 2007) showed that the rural

population’s main problems were unem-

ployment and low salaries, lack of enter-

tainment and more generally opportunities

for children and young people, and envi-

ronmental impacting on the quality of life

in these regions. The sharp decline in the

importance of agriculture and fishing, which

face a gloomy future, are key factors under-

pinning the deterioration of the economic

situation in rural areas.

Turkmenistan’s Balkan province displays

similar trends to its Kazakh neighbours.While

the energy sector is growing in importance,

agriculture accounts for about 7% of GRP.

The province’s arid pastures are an impor-

tant feeding ground for about 15% of coun-

try’s sheep and goats and for one third of

its camel stock (Turkmenmilliihasabat; CEP

2006 a). Fisheries have generally declined in

importance since the 1980–90s, yet they re-

main an important source of income for fish-

ing communities and state enterprises, with

an annual catch totalling 15–20 000 tonnes

of fish in the Caspian (Berkeliev 2006).

The Balkan province shows signs of de-

veloping into an increasingly specialized

economy dependent on the fuel-and-energy

sector. Employment options in other sec-

tors are limited, a situation worsened by the

fact that many industries on which various

small towns such as Garabogaz or Khazar

depended have gone into decline due to low

profitability. Furthermore the low incomes

from traditional activities such as grazing or

fisheries, combinedwith a rise in living stand-

ards, make these sectors less attractive and

may even lead to the gradual destruction of

the way of life in Turkmenistan’s fishing and

pastoral communities. There are also recent

plans to boost coastal tourism develop-

ment on the Caspian Sea

, particularly in

the Turkmen sector. Recently the President

of Turkmenistan, Mr. Berdymuhamedov,

pointed out that the “Caspian seashore is

a unique, ecological zone well-known by its

favourable climate and the richest potential

that opens wide perspectives to convert it

to the true recreational pearl”

. According to

recent studies (CEP 2007), the north-eastern

and eastern shores of the Caspian Sea have

low levels of pollution, except for hydro-

carbons which sometimes exceed permis-

sible concentrations in industrial areas and

sea ports. Compared with other larger parts

of the Caspian Sea – of Iran, Azerbaijan or

Russia – the eastern Caspian is considered

less polluted. There are two main factors

contributing to this: fewer rivers – the vec-

tor for most of the pollution – draining into

the sea, and fewer sources of land or sea-

based pollution, combined with low popu-

lation density. Although there is still some

uncertainty regarding the realization of these

plans, in some cases such as Avaza, in Turk-

menistan and Aktau-city in Kazakhstan of-

ficial local tourism and general development

plans have been approved.

At the same time the Turkmenistan govern-

ment’s policies of state support and subsi-

dies for the public sector –mostly financed by

oil and gas revenue – has largely maintained