Environmental terrorism is a new global threat. The modern period of society's development is characterized by an increase in this threat, where terrorism in the traditional view evolves and takes on new outlines. When defining the concept of environmental terrorism, the role of the criminal-legal definition of a crime is of particular importance, since this ultimately reflects the degree of public danger and is reflected in determining an offender's punishment and its appropriate publicity in the media space. This study examines the genesis of the environmental terrorism concept, as well as various approaches to its understanding, taking into account its legal definition. Using the method of political and legal analysis, the study aims to answer the question of whether ecoterrorism is only a manifestation of radical environmentalism, or has different motives. Taking into account the difference in approaches to the concept of “environmental terrorism,” the study also notes a difference in the qualifications of eco-terrorism. This work gives grounds to assert that the absence of a clearly developed conceptual apparatus and the definition of this term in international acts complicates the solution of issues of countering such a phenomenon as environmental terrorism. The study concludes that the concept of environmental terrorism should be considered in terms of its connection with the concept of environmentalism. Terrorist acts that use natural objects (resources) as a political goal should be considered and qualified separately from the environmental terrorism concept because of the differences in the legal nature of these two phenomena. In practical terms, this study is of interest to subjects of political initiative and lawyers engaged in public administration.

环境恐怖主义是一种新的全球威胁。社会发展的现代时期的特点是这种威胁增加，传统观点中的恐怖主义演变并呈现出新的轮廓。在定义环境恐怖主义的概念时，犯罪的刑事法律定义的作用特别重要，因为这最终反映了公共危险的程度，并反映在确定罪犯的惩罚及其在媒体空间的适当宣传上。本研究考察了环境恐怖主义概念的起源，以及对其理解的各种方法，同时考虑了其法律定义。本研究采用政治和法律分析的方法，旨在回答生态恐怖主义是否只是激进环保主义的一种表现形式，或者有不同的动机。考虑到对“环境恐怖主义”概念的理解不同，该研究还注意到生态恐怖主义的资格存在差异。这项工作提供了理由断言，缺乏明确发展的概念机构和国际行为中该术语的定义使解决诸如环境恐怖主义之类的现象的问题变得复杂。研究得出的结论是，环境恐怖主义的概念应从其与环保主义概念的联系来考虑。由于这两种现象的法律性质不同，以自然物体（资源）为政治目标的恐怖主义行为应与环境恐怖主义概念分开考虑和界定。在实践方面，