METHODS FOR THE ECONOMIC VALUATION OF BIODIVERSITY IN POST-CONFLICT AREAS
Статья поступила в редакцию: 01.08.2024
Статья принята к публикации: 02.08.2024
Статья опубликована: 12.08.2024
Keywords:
биоразнообразие, методы экономической оценки биоразнообразия, постконфликтное восстановление, вооружённый конфликт, природные экосистемы, экосистемные услуги.Abstract
In the last decade, there has been a sharp increase in the number and intensity of armed conflicts, which have a negative impact on natural ecosystems and biodiversity, which underpin the formation of flows of ecosystem services that form natural capital. The degradation of natural ecosystems in zones of armed conflict is both a tactic and a consequence of armed struggle. Armed struggle affects natural ecosystems through the direct destruction of individual organisms, the modification of natural ecosystems and the reduction of environmental protection opportunities. The degree of impact of armed conflict on biodiversity can vary considerably, depending on the levels of ecological organization of natural ecosystems, spatial scales and methods of armed struggle. The imperatives of preserving nature during periods of armed struggle and post-conflict reconstruction are formalized in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Assessing and maintaining an acceptable level of ecosystem services and biodiversity in the post-conflict period is necessary to mitigate the significant negative impacts on natural ecosystems in the post-conflict period in areas affected by armed struggle. The purpose of this article is to present methods of economic valuation of biodiversity that can be applied in the development of programs for the post-conflict restoration of territories affected by armed struggle. The author presents a matrix of the impact of biodiversity on the provision of ecosystem services by ecosystems, describes the degree of impact of biodiversity on the processes of providing ecosystem services by various natural ecosystems, and provides an exhaustive list of methods for the economic assessment of biodiversity.
Информация о публикации
Финансирование: Исследование выполнено без привлечения внешнего финансирования, если иное не указано авторами.
Вклад авторов: Все авторы внесли существенный вклад в подготовку статьи, ознакомились с окончательной версией рукописи и одобрили ее к публикации.
Конфликт интересов: Авторы заявляют об отсутствии конфликта интересов, если иное не указано в публикации.
Правообладатель: Издательский дом «Академический».
Условия использования. Статьи текущего года распространяются по подписке на журнал «Финансовый менеджмент». Все права защищены. Полная версия статьи доступна на сайте Научной электронной библиотеки eLIBRARY.RU www.elibrary.ru/contents.asp?titleid=9552 . Материалы предыдущих лет распространяются по лицензии Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) . Метаданные всех статей распространяются по открытой лицензии и могут свободно использоваться в информационных, научных и библиографических целях.
Машиночитаемый файл метаданных: JATS XML
References
OECD, Biodiversity, natural capital and the economy: A policy guide for finance, economic and environment ministers” // OECD Environment Policy Papers. 2021. No. 26. р. 83. DOI: 10.1787/1a1ae114-en.
Ceglar A., Boldrini S., Lelli C., Parisi L., Heemskerk I. The Economy and Banks Need Nature to Survive // European Central Bank, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2023, р. 36. DOI: 10.2866/3563.
Mace G.M., Norris K., Fitter A.H. Biodiversity and ecosystem services: a multilayered relationship // Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2012. Vol. 27. № 1. Р. 19-26.
United Nations. Report of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. Rio Jan. 1992. № 151. Р. 3-14.
IPBES, Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany, 2019. 56 p.
Czajkowski M., Buszko-Briggs M., Hanley N. Valuing changes in forest biodiversity // Ecological Economics. 2009. Vol. 68. № 12. Р. 2910-2917.
Naeem S., Chazdon R., Duffy J., Prager C., Worm B. Biodiversity and human well-being: an essential link for sustainable development // Proceedings: Biological Sciences. 2016. № 283. Р. е.2016209.
Walker B., Pearson L., Harris M., Maler K-G., Li C-Z., et al. Incorporating resilience in the assessment of inclusive wealth: an example from South East Australia // Environmental and Resource Economics. 2010. № 45. Р. 183-202.
Romanelli C., Cooper D., Campbell-Lendrum D., Maiero M., Karesh W., Hunter D., Golden C. Connecting global priorities: Biodiversity and human health: A state of knowledge review. World Health Organization/Secretariat of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, 2015. 365 р.
Laureto L.M.O., Cianciaruso M.V., Samia D.S.M., Functional biodiversity: An overview of its history and applicability // Natureza & Conservagao. 2015. Vol. 13. № 2. Р. 112-116. DOI: 10.1016Zj.ncon.2015.11.001.
Niesenbaum R.A. The Integration of Conservation, Biodiversity, and Sustainability // Sustainability. 2019. Vol. 11. № 17. DOI: 10.3390/su11174676.
Harrison P., Berry P., Simpson G., Haslett J., Blicharska M., Bucur M., Dunford R., Egoh B., Garcia M., Geamana N., et al. Linkages between biodiversity attributes and ecosystem services: A systematic review // Ecosystem Services. 2014. № 9. Р. 191-203.
Maes J., Liquete C., Teller A., Erhard M., Paracchini M.L., Barredo J.I. et al. An indicator framework for assessing ecosystem services in support of the EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 // Ecosystem Services. 2016. № 17. Р. 14-23.
Pearce D.W. Paradoxes in biodiversity conservation // World Economics. 2005. Vol. 6. № 3. Р. 57-69.
Dasgupta P. The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review. London: Her Majesty's Treasury, 2021. 610 р.