IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ura/ecregj/v1y2017i4p1211-1220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Energy Approach to Measure the Region’s Assimilative Capacity

Author

Listed:
  • Irina Belik

    (UrFU)

  • Natalya Starodubets
  • Alena Yachmeneva

    (Ural Federal University named after the First President of Russia B.N. Yeltsin)

Abstract

One of the important problems of the environmental economics is the development of methodology for quantifying the assimilative capacity (AC) of a territory. The article analyzes the existing approaches to determining and assessing the AC of a territory. We justify the advantages of using the energy approach. The authors’ method consists in using the maximum permissible energy load (MPEL) for quantitative assessment of the AC of a territory. MPEL is a value that the ecological and economic system can withstand for a long time without changing its properties. We determine MPEL on the basis of data on the ability of various categories of land to absorb greenhouse gases (GHG), as well as the specific GHG emissions per ton of conventional fuel. Further, we compare the calculated value of MPEL in fuel equivalents with the actual consumption of fuel resources for the needs of the national economy. These values ratio can serve as a standard for measuring and balancing the environmental and economic system. The authors have validated the described method on the example of the Sverdlovsk region, which is characterized by a high level of man’s impact. Calculations show that the actual consumption of fossil fuels in the region exceeds MPEL. That indicates an imbalance in the ecological and economic system and may lead to further deterioration of the environmental quality in the region. The proposed methodological approach and calculations can be used when developing strategic planning documents for a territory, including its energy strategy

Suggested Citation

  • Irina Belik & Natalya Starodubets & Alena Yachmeneva, 2017. "Energy Approach to Measure the Region’s Assimilative Capacity," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(4), pages 1211-1220.
  • Handle: RePEc:ura:ecregj:v:1:y:2017:i:4:p:1211-1220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://economyofregion.ru/Data/Issues/ER2017/December_2017/ERDecember2017_1211_1220.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peskin, Henry M & Delos Angeles, Marian S, 2001. "Accounting for Environmental Services: Contrasting the SEEA and the ENRAP Approaches," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 47(2), pages 203-219, June.
    2. Gilbert, Alison J. & Janssen, Ron, 1998. "Use of environmental functions to communicate the values of a mangrove ecosystem under different management regimes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 323-346, June.
    3. Henry M. Peskin & Marian S. Delos Angeles, 2001. "Accounting for Environmental Services: Contrasting the SEEA and the ENRAP Approaches," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 47(2), pages 203-219, June.
    4. Graciela Chichilnisky & Geoffrey Heal, 1998. "Economic returns from the biosphere," Nature, Nature, vol. 391(6668), pages 629-630, February.
    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. Roumasset, James & Ravago, Majah-Leah & Jandoc, Karl & Arellano, Clarissa, 2016. "Environmental Resources, Shocks, and National Well-Being," MPRA Paper 87715, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Pezzey, John C.V. & Hanley, Nick & Turner, Karen & Tinch, Dugald, 2006. "Comparing augmented sustainability measures for Scotland: Is there a mismatch?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 60-74, April.
    3. Boyd, James & Banzhaf, Spencer, 2007. "What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2-3), pages 616-626, August.
    4. Boyd, James, 2007. "Nonmarket benefits of nature: What should be counted in green GDP?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 716-723, March.
    5. Gren, Ing-Marie & Isacs, Lina, 2009. "Ecosystem services and regional development: An application to Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2549-2559, August.
    6. Edens, Bram & Hein, Lars, 2013. "Towards a consistent approach for ecosystem accounting," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 41-52.
    7. Ling Wang & Zhiying Chen & Zheheng Huang, 2022. "Research on the Effects and Mechanism of Carbon Emission Trading on the Development of Green Economy in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-21, September.
    8. Hougner, Cajsa & Colding, Johan & Soderqvist, Tore, 2006. "Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 364-374, September.
    9. Thomas McGregor & Samuel Wills, 2016. "Surfing A Wave Of Economic Growth," OxCarre Working Papers 170, Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies, University of Oxford.
    10. Ehrlich, Paul R. & Wolff, Gary & Daily, Gretchen C. & Hughes, Jennifer B. & Daily, Scott & Dalton, Michael & Goulder, Lawrence, 1999. "Knowledge and the environment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 267-284, August.
    11. Rao, Nalini S. & Ghermandi, Andrea & Portela, Rosimeiry & Wang, Xuanwen, 2015. "Global values of coastal ecosystem services: A spatial economic analysis of shoreline protection values," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 95-105.
    12. Harris, Michael & Fraser, Iain, 2002. "Natural resource accounting in theory and practice: A critical assessment," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 46(2), pages 1-54.
    13. Dasgupta, Partha, 2000. "Valuation and evaluation: measuring the quality of life and evaluating policy," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6657, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Misael B. Clapano & Jenie Mae T. Diuyan & France Guillian B. Rapiz & Edison D. Macusi, 2022. "Typology of Smallholder and Commercial Shrimp ( Penaeus vannamei ) Farms, including Threats and Challenges in Davao Region, Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-16, May.
    15. Blanco, Esther & Struwe, Natalie & Walker, James M., 2021. "Experimental evidence on sharing rules and additionality in transfer payments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1221-1247.
    16. L H P Gunaratne, 2010. "Policy Options for Sustainable River Sand Mining in Sri Lanka," EEPSEA Research Report rr2010121, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Dec 2010.
    17. Hérivaux, Cécile & Grémont, Marine, 2019. "Valuing a diversity of ecosystem services: The way forward to protect strategic groundwater resources for the future?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 184-193.
    18. N. Zafirah & N. A. Nurin & M. S. Samsurijan & M. H. Zuknik & M. Rafatullah & M. I. Syakir, 2017. "Sustainable Ecosystem Services Framework for Tropical Catchment Management: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-25, April.
    19. William A. Brock & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2003. "Valuing Biodiversity from an Economic Perspective: A Unified Economic, Ecological, and Genetic Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1597-1614, December.
    20. David Pearce, 2008. "Do We Really Care About Biodiversity?," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(4), pages 611-611, August.

    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:ura:ecregj:v:1:y:2017:i:4:p:1211-1220. 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: Alexey Naydenov (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.economyofregion.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.