IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/areint/313637.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ecological and economic reporting as an indicator of the state of forestry land use

Author

Listed:
  • Furdychko, Orest
  • Drebot, Oksana
  • Palianychko, Nina
  • Dankevych, Stepan
  • Okabe, Yoshihiko

Abstract

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to provide a theoretical and methodological justification of the completeness, accessibility and transparency of indicators of environmental and economic reporting of forestry enterprises as an indicator of the state of forestry land use in the context of sustainable development (on the example of Male Polissya of Ukraine); to find out the causal relationships between individual indicators that characterize the course of certain processes in forestry. Methodology / approach. Theoretical and methodological bases of the research are based on the analysis of a set of ecological and economic indicators of reporting of forestry enterprises as indicators of the state of use of forest lands in the context of balanced development. Such methods were used: dialectical method of cognition for the analysis of laws and regulations and scientific works of scientists on the issue of sustainable use of forest lands; method of analogies (transfer of influences that were found in other areas with similar objects and properties, to the area under consideration); analysis of the most pressing problems of accessibility to the public of indicators of the state of forest land use; correlation analysis – in determining the closeness of the relationship between statistical characteristics indicators of forest use; synthesis and logical generalization of conceptual bases of necessity and preconditions of improvement of ecological and economic indicators; monographic to identify factors for improving indicators; abstract-logical theoretical generalizations and formulation of conclusions. In the study we used quantitative analysis with data from primary and secondary sources to assess the availability of information on the state of forestry land use. In this study, there were analyzed not the values of the indicators, but how they were structured and what information they contained. Results. The article summarizes the completeness, accessibility and transparency of the system of indicators of ecological and economic reporting of forestry enterprises on the example of Male Polissya of Ukraine. The work investigates in terms of sustainable land use practices in the field of reporting using data from state and municipal forestry enterprises of Male Polissya of Ukraine, online service ProZvit (freely available database of enterprises since 2016). The studied value of the correlation between the statistical characteristics of individual indicators of forest land use makes it possible to identify the course of certain positive or negative processes in forest land use on the basis of the objectively existing causal relationship between phenomena and indicators. Based on the analysis of the data published on the Internet, some shortcomings of the set of indicators available to the public are highlighted, in particular the need to update them in accordance with the legislation of the European Union. The results of this study indicate the need to rethink the national focus of reporting from a purely economic to environmental and economic. Originality / scientific novelty. The structural scheme of public information access to ecological and economic indicators of forest land use is proposed, which will ensure completeness and transparency, openness and accountability to the public of information on environmental consequences of forest land use. We propose to introduce additional environmental reporting indicators, which can be further used as indicators of the balance of forestry land use in the country, in particular: the accumulation of carbon in forests and changes in such accumulation; degree of soil erosion; humus content; indicators of productivity (quality) of forest lands depending on soil conditions in different areas of Ukraine; indicators of the state of populations of species of fauna and flora to be protected and preserved; diversity of types of natural resources used by the population in the territory of the planned activity and in the zone of its influence; diversity of ecosystem services; in addition to absolute data, apply relative indicators per 1 ha of forest land. We propose to include these indicators in the reporting for the following blocks: the impact on land and soil; impact on fauna, flora, biodiversity; impact on surface waters; impact on landscapes; impact on atmospheric air; carbon accumulation; volumes of reforestation, silvicultural works. Practical value / implications. On the example of forestry enterprises located in the territory of Male Polissya, it is proved that the set of economic and environmental reporting indicators available online is an indicator of the state of use of forestry lands. Based on research, the bases for improvement of the information base of the reporting are prepared at different scales, both in the country and in each forest enterprise in a particular region, as regional sectoral improvements will help achieve balanced land use at the national level.

Suggested Citation

  • Furdychko, Orest & Drebot, Oksana & Palianychko, Nina & Dankevych, Stepan & Okabe, Yoshihiko, 2021. "Ecological and economic reporting as an indicator of the state of forestry land use," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 7(2), June.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:areint:313637
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.313637
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/313637/files/12_Furdychko_article.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.313637?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liubachyna, Anna & Secco, Laura & Pettenella, Davide, 2017. "Reporting practices of State Forest Enterprises in Europe," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 162-172.
    2. Yu. Samoilenko, 2017. "Toolkit of economic guarantees of providing public environmental management projects," Balanced Nature Using, Institute of agroecology and environmental management, vol. 7(3), pages 155-161, September.
    3. Marcos-Martinez, Raymundo & Bryan, Brett A. & Schwabe, Kurt A. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Law, Elizabeth A., 2018. "Forest transition in developed agricultural regions needs efficient regulatory policy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 67-75.
    4. Olha Kravchenko & Anatolii Kucher & Maria Hełdak & Lesia Kucher & Joanna Wysmułek, 2020. "Socio-Economic Transformations in Ukraine towards the Sustainable Development of Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Iryna Zamula & Maryna Tanasiieva & Vitalii Travin & Vitalii Nitsenko & Tomas Balezentis & Dalia Streimikiene, 2020. "Assessment of the Profitability of Environmental Activities in Forestry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-15, April.
    6. Köhl, Michael & Neupane, Prem Raj & Mundhenk, Philip, 2020. "REDD+ measurement, reporting and verification – A cost trap? Implications for financing REDD+MRV costs by result-based payments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    7. Zhang, Kerong & Song, Conghe & Zhang, Yulong & Zhang, Quanfa, 2017. "Natural disasters and economic development drive forest dynamics and transition in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 56-64.
    8. Ochieng, R.M. & Visseren-Hamakers, I.J. & Brockhaus, M. & Kowler, L.F. & Herold, M. & Arts, B., 2016. "Historical development of institutional arrangements for forest monitoring and REDD+ MRV in Peru: Discursive-institutionalist perspectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 52-59.
    9. Shi, Miaoying & Yin, Runsheng & Lv, Hongdi, 2017. "An empirical analysis of the driving forces of forest cover change in northeast China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 78-87.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Koliadenko, Svitlana & Andreichenko, Andrii & Galperina, Liubov & Minenko, Sofiia & Kovylina, Maria, 2020. "Analysis and forecasting of Ukrainian agrarian exports to the EU countries," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(3), September.
    2. Zamula, Iryna & Prodanchuk, Mykhailo & Kovalchuk, Tatiana & Mуhalkiv, Alla & Simakov, Kostiantyn, 2020. "Engineering of business processes in accounting support of cash management," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(3), September.
    3. Longhui Lu & An Huang & Yueqing Xu & Raymundo Marcos-Martinez & Yaming Duan & Zhengxin Ji, 2020. "The Influences of Livelihood and Land Use on the Variation of Forest Transition in a Typical Mountainous Area of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-23, November.
    4. Liping Zhao & Xincheng Li & Xiangmei Li & Chenyang Ai, 2022. "Dynamic Changes and Regional Differences of Net Carbon Sequestration of Food Crops in the Yangtze River Economic Belt of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-16, October.
    5. Poduška, Zoran & Nedeljković, Jelena & Nonić, Dragan & Ratknić, Tatjana & Ratknić, Mihailo & Živojinović, Ivana, 2020. "Intrapreneurial climate as momentum for fostering employee innovativeness in public forest enterprises," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Skrynkovskyy, Ruslan & Pavlenchyk, Nataliia & Tsyuh, Svyatoslav & Zanevskyy, Ihor & Pavlenchyk, Anatoliі, 2022. "Economic-mathematical model of enterprise profit maximization in the system of sustainable development values," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 8(4), December.
    7. Dmytro Liudvenko, 2020. "Information Needs of an Environmentally Conscious Society regarding the Functioning of Animal Husbandry Enterprises," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 22-29, December.
    8. Beygi Heidarlou, Hadi & Banj Shafiei, Abbas & Erfanian, Mahdi & Tayyebi, Amin & Alijanpour, Ahmad, 2020. "Armed conflict and land-use changes: Insights from Iraq-Iran war in Zagros forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    9. Hag Mo Kang & Dae Sung Lee & Soo Im Choi & Sohui Jeon & Chong Kyu Lee & Hyun Kim, 2020. "Problems and Challenges: A Private Forest Purchase Method for National Forest Expansion in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-13, October.
    10. Liu, Shilei & Xia, Jun, 2021. "Forest harvesting restriction and forest restoration in China," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    11. Daniel Halaj & Klára Báliková & Yvonne Brodrechtová, 2022. "The perception of an image of the state forest enterprise by general public in chosen region of the Slovak Republic," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(1), pages 26-34.
    12. Marcos-Martinez, Raymundo & Bryan, Brett A. & Schwabe, Kurt A. & Connor, Jeffery D. & Law, Elizabeth A. & Nolan, Martin & Sánchez, José J., 2019. "Projected social costs of CO2 emissions from forest losses far exceed the sequestration benefits of forest gains under global change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Alexey Dushin, 2022. "Valuating Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services: Systematic Review of Methods in Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-17, February.
    14. Edgar Lorenzo-Sáez & Jose-Vicente Oliver-Villanueva & Victoria Lerma-Arce & Celia Yagüe-Hurtado & Lenin Guillermo Lemus-Zúñiga, 2021. "Potential Analysis of Mediterranean Forestry for Offsetting GHG Emissions at Regional Level: Evidence from Valencia, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    15. Caravaggio, Nicola, 2020. "A global empirical re-assessment of the Environmental Kuznets curve for deforestation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    16. Lei Zhang & Gui Jin & Qing Wan & Yanfang Liu & Xiaojian Wei, 2018. "Measurement of Ecological Land Use/Cover Change and Its Varying Spatiotemporal Driving Forces by Statistical and Survival Analysis: A Case Study of Yingkou City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-17, December.
    17. Stephen Wyatt & Sara Teitelbaum, 2020. "Certifying a state forestry agency in Quebec: Complementarity and conflict around government responsibilities, indigenous rights, and certification of the state as forest manager," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 551-567, July.
    18. Colaço, Rui & Simão, João, 2018. "Disclosure of corporate social responsibility in the forestry sector of the Congo Basin," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 136-147.
    19. Orest Furdychko & Oksana Drebot & Nina Palianychko & Stepan Dankevych, 2020. "Tools of the Financial and Economic Mechanism for the Balanced Use of Forestry Land in Ukraine," Oblik i finansi, Institute of Accounting and Finance, issue 4, pages 144-157, December.
    20. Zhuk, Valerii & Zamula, Iryna & Liudvenko, Dmytro & Popko, Yevheniya, 2020. "Development of non-financial reporting of agricultural enterprises of Ukraine," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 6(4), December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:areint:313637. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://are-journal.com/are .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.