Accounting of ecosystem services in the resource efficiency assessment of specially protected natural territories of the Komi Republic

Автор: Tikhonova Tatyana V., Schenyavskii Vitalii A.

Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en

Рубрика: Environmental economics

Статья в выпуске: 1 т.14, 2021 года.

Бесплатный доступ

One of the integral methods for assessing resource efficiency is the adjustment of net savings. It happens due to many indicators, including the assessment of specially protected natural territories. The author’s opinion is associated with the assessment of tourism activities at these sites and consideration of the value of regulating ecosystem territories’ services. The objectives of the study are the identification of approaches and assessment of protected areas; selection of “profitable” ecosystem services in regional protected areas; and submission of proposals for the effective usage of these territories. The calculation involves a combination of two methods: assessment of the gross value added of tourist destinations in protected areas and the value of regulatory ecosystem services. Tourism efficiency from the position of creating value chains destinations reflects the rate of gross value added, which is calculated as the difference between the proceeds from sales of tourist services entities and their material costs. To determine the economic value of regulatory services, the methods of market indirect assessment and compensation costs were used. During the calculation of ecosystem services, we selected those with beneficiaries located in the region. Increasing efficiency of facilities requires conditions for the development of recreation and new activities. These conditions are shown in the strengthening of interaction between administrations of protected areas with service companies that provide a quality factor of infrastructure, availability of facilities and food services. The economic contribution of specially protected natural areas from the usage of regulating ecosystem services and tourist and recreational activities amounted to 20.4 billion rubles, or 3.2% of gross regional product, in 2018. The proposed approach allows us to show the socio-economic and environmental contribution of specially protected natural areas to the economy of the Komi Republic.

Еще

Gross regional product, gross value added, monetary value assessment, specially protected natural areas, tourist destinations, ecosystem services

Короткий адрес: https://readera.org/147225513

IDR: 147225513   |   DOI: 10.15838/esc.2021.1.73.8

Список литературы Accounting of ecosystem services in the resource efficiency assessment of specially protected natural territories of the Komi Republic

  • Costanza R., de Groot R., Braat L., Kubiszewski I., Fioramonti L., Sutton P., Farber S., Grasso M. Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go? Ecosystem Services, 2017, vol. 28, pp. 1–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.09.008
  • Ekosistemnye uslugi Rossii: Prototip natsional’nogo doklada [Ecosystem Services of Russia: Prototype of the National Report]. Vol. 1. Uslugi nazemnykh ekosistem [Terrestrial ecosystem services]. Ed. by E.N. Bukvareva, D.G. Zamolodchikov. Moscow: Izd-vo Tsentra okhrany dikoi prirody, 2016. 148 p.
  • Mekush G.E., Ushakova E.O. Assessment of value ecosystem services for the development tourism and recreation. Vestnik Sibir. gos. un-ta geosistem i tekhnologii=Vestnik of the Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies (SSUGT), 2016, no. 1 (33), pp. 200–209 (in Russian).
  • Kasimov D.V., Kasimov V.D. Nekotorye podkhody k otsenke ekosistemnykh funktsii (uslug) lesnykh nasazhdenii v praktike prirodopol’zovaniya [Some Approaches to the Assessment of Ecosystem Functions (Services) of Forest Plantations in the Practice of Nature Management]. Moscow: Mir nauki, 2015. 91 p.
  • Tarasov S.N., Grigoryan A.R. Organizatsiya ustoichivogo zhizneobespecheniya naseleniya na osobo okhranyaemykh prirodnykh territoriyakh: kontseptual’nye osnovy i prakticheskoe rukovodstvo [Organization of Sustainable Life Support for the Population in Specially Protected Natural Areas: Conceptual Foundations and Practical Guidance]. Krasnoyarsk: PROON, 2009. 112 p.
  • Fomenko G.A., Fomenko M.A., Mikhailova A.V., Mikhailova T.R. Ekonomicheskaya otsenka osobo okhranyaemykh prirodnykh territorii Kamchatki: prakticheskie rezul’taty i ikh znachenie dlya sokhraneniya bioraznoobraziya (na primere prirodnogo parka «Bystrinskii») [Economic Assessment of Specially Protected Natural Areas of Kamchatka: Practical Results and their Implications for Biodiversity Conservation (case study of the natural park “Bystrinskii”]. Yaroslavl: ANO NIPI «Kadastr», 2010. 156 p.
  • Tikhonova T.V. Ecosystem services: The role in regional economy and the approaches to evaluation. Izvestiya Komi NTs=Proceedings of the Komi Science Centre of the Ural Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 2016, no. 3 (27), pp. 134–143. Available at: 10.19110/1994-5655-2018-4-122-135 (in Russian).
  • Tsennost’ lesov. Plata za ekosistemnye uslugi v usloviyakh «zelenoi» ekonomiki [The Value of Forests: Payments for Ecosystem Services in a Green Economy]. UNO. Geneva, 2014. 94 p.
  • Peña-Lévano L.M., Taheripour F., Tyner W.E. Climate change interactions with agriculture, forestry sequestration, and food security. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2019, vol. 74, pp. 653–675. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-019-00339-6
  • Smith G., Day B., Binner A. Multiple- purchaser payments for ecosystem services: An exploration using spatial simulation modeling. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2019, vol. 74, pp. 421–447. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-019-00324-z
  • Yakubovskii E.V. Use of payments for ecosystem services in environmental management. Novaya ekonomika=New Economics, 2015, no. 2, pp. 234–238 (in Russian).
  • Ríos C.A., Amorocho R., Villarreal C.A., Mantilla W., Velandia F.A., Castellanos O.M., Muñoz S.I., Atuesta D.A., Jerez J.H., Acevedo O., Agrs M., Caballero V.M., Goso C.A., Brigg A. Chicamocha Canyon Geopark project: A novel strategy for the socio-economic development of Santander (Colombia) through geoeducation, geotourism and geoconservation. International Journal of Geoheritage and Parksjournal, 2020, vol. 8, pp. 96–122. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgeop.2020.05.002
  • Grunewald K., Bastian O., Drozdov A., Grabovsky V. Erfassung und Bewertung von Ökosystemdienstleistungen (ÖSD). Bonn: Bundesamt für Naturschutz, 2014. 374 р.
  • Costanza R. Valuing natural capital and ecosystem services toward the goals of efficiency, fairness, and sustainability. Ecosystem Services, 2020, vol. 43, pp. 1–7. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101096
  • Sónia M. Ribeiro C., Filho B., Costa W., Bachi L, Oliveira A., Bilotta P., Saadi A., Lopes E., O’Riordan T., Pennacchio H., Queiroz L., Hecht S., Rajão R., Oliveira U., Sampaio C. Can multifunctional livelihoods including recreational ecosystem services (RES) and non timber forest products (NTFP) maintain biodiverse forests in the Brazilian Amazon? Ecosystem Services, 2018, vol. 31, pp. 517–526. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2018.03.016
  • Groot R., Brander L., Ploeg S., Costanza R., Bernard F., Braat L., Christie M., Crossman N., Ghermandi A., Hein L., Hussain S., Kumar P., Vittie A., Portela R., Rodriguez L., Brinkm P., Beukering P. Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosystem Services, 2012, vol. 1, pp. 50–61. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2012.07.005
  • Tikhonova T.V., Shchenyavskii V.A. Correction of indicators of resource efficiency on the example of specially protected natural objects. Chasopis ekonomichnikh reform=Time Description of Economic Reforms, 2019, no. 2 (34), pp. 86–94. DOI: 10.32620/cher.2019.2.10 (in Russian).
  • Bobylev S.N., Minakov V.S., Solov’eva S.V., Tret’yakov V.V. Ekologo-ekonomicheskii indeks regionov RF [Ecological and Economic Index of the Regions of the Russian Federation].World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and RIA Novosti, 2012. 152 p.
  • Font X., Garay L., Jone S. Sustainability motivations and practices in small tourism enterprises in European protected areas. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2016, vol. 137, pp. 1439–1448. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.01.071
  • Tatarinov A.A., Fomenko G.A., Fomenko M.A. Challenges of implementing the system of environmentaleconomic accounting in Russia. Voprosy statistiki=Voprosy Statistiki, 2018, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 68–78 (in Russian).
  • Snakin V.V., Es’kov E.V., Mitenko G.V., Ospennikov Yu.V. Ecosystem services of protected natural areas. Zhizn’ zemli=The Life of the Earth, 2015, vol. 37, pp. 98–102 (in Russian).
  • Mekush G.E., Ushakova E.O. Assessment of value ecosystem services for the development tourism and recreation. Vestnik SGUGiT=Vestnik of the Siberian State University of Geosystems and Technologies (SSUGT), 2016, no. 1 (33), pp. 200–209 (in Russian).
  • Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being. UNEP, Island Press, Washington DC, 2005. 283 p.
  • Boldyreva S.B. The impact of tourism on socio-economic development of the region: Generalization of Russian and foreign experience. Regional’naya ekonomika: teoriya i praktika=Regional Economics: Theory and Practice, 2018, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 972–988. DOI: org/10.24891/re.16.5.972 (in Russian).
  • Shkiperova G.T. Assessment of eco-economic effect for specially protected areas. Sotsial’noe prostranstvo=SocialArea, 2018, no. 3 (15). DOI: 10.15838/sa.2018.3.15.5 (in Russian).
  • Spenceley A., Meyer D. Tourism and poverty reduction: theory and practice in less economically developed countries. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2012, vol. 20, pp. 297–317.
  • Dets I.A. Tourism and other types of revenues of protected natural areas: opportunities and prospects. Sovremennye problemy servisa i turizma=Service And Tourism: Current Challenges, 2018, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 43–51. DOI: 10.24411/1995-0411-2018-10304 (in Russian).
  • Porter M. Mezhdunarodnaya konkurentsiya: Konkurentnye preimushchestva stran [International Competition: Competitive Advantages of Countries]. Moscow: Al’pina Pablisher, 2016. 946 p.
  • Möller K., Rajala A. Rise of strategic nets – new modes of value creation. Rossiiskii zhurnal menedzhmenta=Russian Management Journal, 2008, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 113–140 (in Russian).
  • Rubtsova N.V. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskaya effektivnost’ turistskoi deyatel’nosti: teoriya, metodologiya, praktika [Socio-Economic Efficiency of Tourism: Theory, Methodology, Practice]. Irkutsk: Izd-vo BGUEP, 2015. 212 p.
  • Tikhonova T.V. The problem of damage assessment when making economic decisions in the Northern territories. Problemy razvitiya territorii=Problems of Territory’s Development, 2020, no. 2 (106), pp. 95–107. DOI: 10.15838/ptd.2020.2.106.7 (in Russian).
  • Job H., Becken S., Lan B. Protected areas, sustainable tourism neo-liberal governance policies: Issues, management and research. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2017, vol. 25, issue 12. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017.1377432
  • Puzachenko Yu.G. General basis of conception of sustainable development and ecosystem surveys. Izvestiya RAN. Seriya geograficheskaya=Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk. Seriya Geograficheskaya, 2012, no. 3, pp. 22–39 (in Russian).
  • Vic Li, Lang Gr. China’s “Green GDP” experiment and the struggle for ecological modernization. J. Contemporary Asia, 2010, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 44–62.
  • Grunewald K. et al. Erfassung und Bewertung von Ökosystemdienstleistungen (ÖSD). Bundesamt für Naturschutz, 2014. 374 р.
  • Tikhonova T.V. Assessment of ecosystem services of rural territories of the Komi Republic. Sever i rynok: formirovanie ekonomicheskogo poryadka=The North and the Market: Forming the Economic Order, 2018, no. 5 (61), pp. 171–183. Available at: 10.25702/KSC.2220-802X.5.2018.61.167-179 (in Russian).
Еще
Статья научная