IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ach/journl/y2018id691.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The mechanism of variants of ecosystem conservation options taking into accounting regional and technological features of mining enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • A. V. Myaskov
  • A. S. Tulupov
  • O. V. Zhironkina
  • V. S. Zaitsev

Abstract

At the moment, inRussia, entering the next stage of economic development, which is based primarily on the use of natural resources, a new environmental policy must be developed, an integral part of which is the protection of nature, natural ecosystems and their basis – biodiversity. Based on the Convention on Biological Diversity, a number of measures have been proposed within the framework of the National Biodiversity Strategy inRussia, with the help of which the whole process of conservation of natural ecosystems in the country should be carried out. Unfortunately, up to now the proposed measures are practically not applied in practice, and first of all it concerns the economic levers of biodiversity conservation. So the economic regulation of the protection and use of wildlife, among other things, includes: accounting and economic valuation of objects of the animal kingdom; an economically justified system of payments for the use of wildlife; budget financing of measures to protect and reproduce natural ecosystems; economically justified system of fines and claims for violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation. At the same time, economic incentives for the protection, reproduction and sustainable use of wildlife include: the establishment of tax and other benefits granted to legal entities and citizens that ensure the protection, reproduction and sustainable use of wildlife, as well as the protection and improvement of their habitat. Based on this, it can be said that the purpose of these activities is to improve the environmental management process in industrial regions based on the development of an economic regulatory mechanism and an environmental and economic assessment of conservation of biological diversity as the basis for the existence of natural ecosystems.

Suggested Citation

  • A. V. Myaskov & A. S. Tulupov & O. V. Zhironkina & V. S. Zaitsev, 2018. "The mechanism of variants of ecosystem conservation options taking into accounting regional and technological features of mining enterprises," Russian Journal of Industrial Economics, MISIS, vol. 11(3).
  • Handle: RePEc:ach:journl:y:2018:id:691
    DOI: 10.17073/2072-1633-2018-3-273-279
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ecoprom.misis.ru/jour/article/viewFile/691/623
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17073/2072-1633-2018-3-273-279?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. Martin, Chris J., 2016. "The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 149-159.
    2. Boerema, A. & Van Passel, S. & Meire, P., 2018. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Ecosystem Management With Ecosystem Services: From Theory to Practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 207-218.
    3. 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.
    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. Aymerich Jiménez, Marta, 2018. "Do we need or we want to share? The Role of Non Profit Sharing platforms," Working Papers 2072/351584, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    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. Szalavetz, Andrea, 2018. "Digitális átalakulás és fenntarthatóság. A technológiaoptimista környezetgazdászok és a pesszimista ökológiai közgazdászok közötti vita újraindítása [Digital transformation and environmental sustai," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1067-1088.
    4. Zhe Yu & Chunwei Song & Huishi Du, 2024. "Dynamic Changes in Ecosystem Service Value and Ecological Compensation in Original Continuous Poverty-Stricken Areas of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-22, May.
    5. David Boto-García & Veronica Leoni, 2022. "The hedonic value of coastal amenities in peer-to-peer markets," DEA Working Papers 94, Universitat de les Illes Balears, Departament d'Economía Aplicada.
    6. Jacobs, Sander & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David N. & Dunford, Robert & Harrison, Paula A. & Kelemen, Eszter & Saarikoski, Heli & Termansen, Mette & García-Llorente, Marina & Gómez-Baggethun, Erik, 2018. "The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 515-528.
    7. Küper, Inken & Edinger-Schons, Laura Marie, 2020. "Is sharing up for sale? Monetary exchanges in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 223-234.
    8. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    9. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    10. Mohan Kumar Rai & Basanta Paudel & Yili Zhang & Pashupati Nepal & Narendra Raj Khanal & Linshan Liu & Raju Rai, 2023. "Appraisal of Empirical Studies on Land-Use and Land-Cover Changes and Their Impact on Ecosystem Services in Nepal Himalaya," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-19, April.
    11. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    12. Shanwen Zheng & Baolong Han & Dang Wang & Zhiyun Ouyang, 2018. "Ecological Wisdom and Inspiration Underlying the Planning and Construction of Ancient Human Settlements: Case Study of Hongcun UNESCO World Heritage Site in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, April.
    13. Zhang, Biao & Li, Wenhua & Xie, Gaodi, 2010. "Ecosystem services research in China: Progress and perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(7), pages 1389-1395, May.
    14. Johansen, Pia Heike & Ejrnæs, Rasmus & Kronvang, Brian & Olsen, Jakob Vesterlund & Præstholm, Søren & Schou, Jesper S., 2018. "Pursuing collective impact: A novel indicator-based approach to assessment of shared measurements when planning for multifunctional land consolidation," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 102-114.
    15. Alamanos, Angelos & Koundouri, Phoebe, 2022. "Economics of Incorporating Ecosystem Services into Water Resource Planning and Management," MPRA Paper 122046, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Ciftcioglu, Gulay Cetinkaya, 2017. "Social preference-based valuation of the links between home gardens, ecosystem services, and human well-being in Lefke Region of North Cyprus," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 227-236.
    17. Hamid Yeganeh, 2019. "An Analysis of Emerging Patterns of Consumption in the Age of Globalization and Digitalization," FIIB Business Review, , vol. 8(4), pages 259-270, December.
    18. Zilang Cheng & Yanjun Zhang & Lingzhi Wang & Lanyi Wei & Xuying Wu, 2022. "An Analysis of Land-Use Conflict Potential Based on the Perspective of Production–Living–Ecological Function," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-20, May.
    19. Fuglsang, Lars & Hansen, Anne Vorre, 2022. "Framing improvements of public innovation in a living lab context: Processual learning, restrained space and democratic engagement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    20. Nabahungu, N.L. & Visser, S.M., 2011. "Contribution of wetland agriculture to farmers' livelihood in Rwanda," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 4-12.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:ach:journl:y:2018:id:691. 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: Главный контакт редакции (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://misis.ru .

    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.