IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i21p9236-d440967.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Look at the Natural Capital Concept: Approaches, Structure, and Evaluation Procedure

Author

Listed:
  • Margarita Ignatyeva

    (Research Laboratory of Disturbed Lands’ and Technogenic Objects’ Reclamation, Ural State Mining University, 620144 Yekaterinburg, Russia
    Center for Nature Management and Geoecology, Institute of Economics, The Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 620014 Yekaterinburg, Russia)

  • Vera Yurak

    (Research Laboratory of Disturbed Lands’ and Technogenic Objects’ Reclamation, Ural State Mining University, 620144 Yekaterinburg, Russia
    Center for Nature Management and Geoecology, Institute of Economics, The Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 620014 Yekaterinburg, Russia)

  • Oksana Logvinenko

    (Department of Economics and Management, Ural State Mining University, 620144 Yekaterinburg, Russia)

Abstract

This article considers the concept of natural capital as a basic construct of sustainable development. However, after numerous studies, a number of aspects of accounting and valuation of natural capital remain unspecified. The relevance and imperfection of the guidelines used to assess natural capital make relevant the development of such issues as the conceptual apparatus and methods to natural capital assessment. Therefore, the core objectives of the paper are: (1) to substantiate the structure of natural capital, taking into account the natural resources and ecosystem approaches; (2) to clarify the concepts of “function” and “services” in relation to abiotic and biotic components of the environment; (3) to generalize and analyze the classifications of ecosystem services, and to develop the authors’ classification; (4) to identify the most common methods for the economic assessment of natural capital’s components, and to implement these methods within a specific territory. These methods have been tested on the Khanty–Mansi Autonomous Okrug (KhMAD, Russia). The most typical ecosystems of the region and their inherent ecosystem services have been identified. Assessment results are presented for (1) forest ecosystems, (2) mountain ecosystems, and (3) ecosystems of swamps, lakes, and rivers.

Suggested Citation

  • Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Oksana Logvinenko, 2020. "A New Look at the Natural Capital Concept: Approaches, Structure, and Evaluation Procedure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9236-:d:440967
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9236/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/21/9236/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Hepburn, Cameron & Teytelboym, Alexander & Cohen, Francois, 2018. "Is Natural Capital Really Substitutable?," INET Oxford Working Papers 2018-12, Institute for New Economic Thinking at the Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford.
    3. Aleksandr Tatarkin & Irina Polyanskaya & Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak, 2014. "Consistent assessment of the status and prospects of institutional and innovational subsurface resources management in the arctic zone," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(4), pages 146-158.
    4. Emma Hooper, 2019. "Sustainable growth and financial markets in a natural resource-rich country," Post-Print hal-02428952, HAL.
    5. van Beukering, Pieter J. H. & Cesar, Herman S. J. & Janssen, Marco A., 2003. "Economic valuation of the Leuser National Park on Sumatra, Indonesia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 43-62, February.
    6. Irina Polyanskaya & Vera Yurak, 2017. "Institutional Assessment of Environmentally Oriented Subsoil Use," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(2), pages 355-368.
    7. Aleksandr Tatarkin & Irina Polyanskaya & Margaret Ignatieva & Vera Yurak, 2014. "Consistent assessment of the status and prospects of institutional and innovational subsurface resources management in the arctic zone," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 146-158.
    8. Maes, Mikaël J.A. & Jones, Kate E. & Toledano, Mireille B. & Milligan, Ben, 2020. "Accounting for natural capital has cross-cutting relevance for UK public sector decision-making," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    9. Larue, Louis, 2020. "The Ecology of Money: A Critical Assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    10. Enric Camón Luis & Dolors Celma, 2020. "Circular Economy. A Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-23, August.
    11. Hein, Lars & Remme, Roy P. & Schenau, Sjoerd & Bogaart, Patrick W. & Lof, Marjolein E. & Horlings, Edwin, 2020. "Ecosystem accounting in the Netherlands," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    12. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    13. Akbulut, Bengi & Adaman, Fikret, 2020. "The Ecological Economics of Economic Democracy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    14. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 67-72, April.
    15. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    16. Hooper, Emma, 2019. "Sustainable growth and financial markets in a natural resource-rich country," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 341-348.
    17. Chung-Shing Chan & Kazuo Nozu & Qinrou Zhou, 2020. "Tourism Stakeholder Perspective for Disaster-Management Process and Resilience: The Case of the 2018 Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Konstantinos Mantalovas & Gaetano Di Mino & Ana Jimenez Del Barco Carrion & Elisabeth Keijzer & Björn Kalman & Tony Parry & Davide Lo Presti, 2020. "European National Road Authorities and Circular Economy: An Insight into Their Approaches," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, September.
    19. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    20. Irina Polyanskaya & Vera Yurak, 2018. "Balanced Natural Resource Management of a Region: Estimation by Dynamic Normal Technique," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 851-869.
    21. Canh, Nguyen Phuc & Schinckus, Christophe & Thanh, Su Dinh, 2020. "The natural resources rents: Is economic complexity a solution for resource curse?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    22. Bliss, Sam & Egler, Megan, 2020. "Ecological Economics Beyond Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    23. Andrew R. Tilman & Joshua B. Plotkin & Erol Akçay, 2020. "Evolutionary games with environmental feedbacks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 11(1), pages 1-11, December.
    24. Aleksandr Tatarkin & Valeriy Balashenko & Margarita Ignatyeva & Vladimir Loginov, 2016. "Methodological Tools for Assessing the Investment Attractiveness of Renewable Resources in Northern and Arctic Territories," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(3), pages 627-637.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Chenxi Li & Zhihong Zong & Haichao Qie & Yingying Fang & Qiao Liu, 2023. "CiteSpace and Bibliometric Analysis of Published Research on Forest Ecosystem Services for the Period 2018–2022," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-16, April.
    3. Claudio Fagarazzi & Carlotta Sergiacomi & Federico M. Stefanini & Enrico Marone, 2021. "A Model for the Economic Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services: The Recreational Hunting Function in the Agroforestry Territories of Tuscany (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-15, October.

    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. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo, 2014. "Ecosystem services assessment: A review under an ecological-economic and systems perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 289(C), pages 124-132.
    2. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    3. Sinden, John Alfred & Griffith, Garry, 2007. "Combining economic and ecological arguments to value the environmental gains from control of 35 weeds in Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 396-408, March.
    4. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    5. María del Pilar García Pachón, 2016. "Instrumentos Económicos Y Financieros Para La Gestión Ambiental," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 853, October.
    6. Natacha LASKOWSKI, 2013. "Optimal allocation of wetlands: Study on conflict between agriculture and fishery," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2013-07, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    7. Watson, Stephen C.L. & Paterson, David M. & Queirós, Ana M. & Rees, Andrew P. & Stephens, Nicholas & Widdicombe, Stephen & Beaumont, Nicola J., 2016. "A conceptual framework for assessing the ecosystem service of waste remediation: In the marine environment," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 69-81.
    8. Henghui Xi & Wanglai Cui & Li Cai & Mengyuan Chen & Chenglei Xu, 2021. "Evaluation and Prediction of Ecosystem Service Value in the Zhoushan Islands Based on LUCC," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    9. Costanza, Robert & Fisher, Brendan & Mulder, Kenneth & Liu, Shuang & Christopher, Treg, 2007. "Biodiversity and ecosystem services: A multi-scale empirical study of the relationship between species richness and net primary production," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 478-491, March.
    10. Sutton, Paul C. & Costanza, Robert, 2002. "Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 509-527, June.
    11. Prévost, Benoît & Rivaud, Audrey, 2018. "The World Bank’s environmental strategies: Assessing the influence of a biased use of New Institutional Economics on legal issues," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PB), pages 370-380.
    12. Costanza, Robert & de Groot, Rudolf & Braat, Leon & Kubiszewski, Ida & Fioramonti, Lorenzo & Sutton, Paul & Farber, Steve & Grasso, Monica, 2017. "Twenty years of ecosystem services: How far have we come and how far do we still need to go?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 1-16.
    13. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Samdin, Zaiton & Noor Ghani, Awang, 2020. "Willingness to Pay for Conservation of Mangrove Forest in Kuala Perlis, Malaysia," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 54(3), pages 89-99.
    14. Zhuohang Xin & Chao Li & Haixing Liu & Hua Shang & Lei Ye & Yu Li & Chi Zhang, 2018. "Evaluation of Temporal and Spatial Ecosystem Services in Dalian, China: Implications for Urban Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    15. Jean-Michel Salles, 2011. "Valuing biodiversity and ecosystem services: why linking economic values with Nature?," Working Papers 11-24, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Dec 2011.
    16. Zhou, Peng & Zhang, Haijie & Huang, Bei & Ji, Yongli & Peng, Shaolin & Zhou, Ting, 2022. "Are productivity and biodiversity adequate predictors for rapid assessment of forest ecosystem services values?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    17. Komeil JAHANIFAR & Hamid AMIRNEJAD & Zahra ABEDI & Alireza VAFAEINEJAD, 2017. "Estimation of the value of forest ecosystem services to develop conservational strategy management (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats)," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 63(7), pages 300-312.
    18. Ingraham, Molly W. & Foster, Shonda Gilliland, 2008. "The value of ecosystem services provided by the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System in the contiguous U.S," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(4), pages 608-618, November.
    19. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    20. Wang, Han & Tian, Fuan & Wu, Jianxian & Nie, Xin, 2023. "Is China forest landscape restoration (FLR) worth it? A cost-benefit analysis and non-equilibrium ecological view," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:21:p:9236-:d:440967. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.