Ural State Mining University, Yekaterinburg, Russia:

Ignatieva M. N., Professor, Doctor of Economic Sciences, ief.em@ursmu.ru
Yurak V. V., Associate Professor, Candidate of Economic Sciences
Logvinenko O. A., Senior Lecturer

The problems of economic assessment of natural capital as the most important category of ecological economy are considered in the modern context of sustainable development. It is required to improve the procedures and methods for natural capital accounting in accordance with the international environmental and economic standards in the System of National Accounts. Historical features of transformation of the term “natural capital” are analyzed in terms of the natural resource and ecosystem approaches. The principles of economic assessment of natural resources are proposed. The compliance with these principles is a necessary condition of the quality of information received. The formation of the structure of the natural capital accounts is analyzed in the case-studies of Great Britain as one of the first countries that switched to monetary reflection of ecosystem services in the national wealth and of a region of the Russian Federation in o rder to identify the structural uniformity of natural capital calculated in monetary terms. Data on the value of the underestimate part of the national wealth generated by forest ecosystems in Russia are obtained.

The research was supported by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education under state contract with the Ural State Mining University, Contract No. 075–03–2021–303 dated 29 December 2020.

1. Glazyrina I. P. Natural capital in the Economics of Transition Period. Мoscow : NIA Priroda, REFIA. 2001. 204 p.
2. Dushin A. V., Yurak V. V. Authors’ approach to the Total Economic Value: Essentials, structure, evolution. Eurasian Mining. 2018. No. 1. pp. 11–15. DOI: 10.17580/em.2018.01.03
3. Logvinenko О. А. Transformation of views on the content and methods of economic assessment of natural resources. News of the Ural State Mining University. 2019. Vol. 4(56). pp. 160–168.
4. Kunt A., Hamilton A., Dixon J., Clemens M. Estimating National Wealth: Methodology and Results. The World Bank, Еnvironmentally Sustainable Development, 1998.
5. Glazyrina I. P. Institutional context of environmental Economics. Institutional transformation of the economy: space and time. 2017. pp. 128–132.
6. Official statistical methodology for assessing the reserves of non-cultivated biological resources : Approved by the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation, Order No. 448 as of 25.09.2018.
7. Costanza R., Daly H. E. Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology. 1992. Vol. 6, No. 1. pp. 37–46.
8. Ivanov A. N., Logvinenko O. A., Ignatieva M. N. Economic assessment of environmental consequences in subsoil use. Izvestiya vuzov. Gornyi zhurnal. 2019. No. 6. pp. 98–107. DOI: 10.21440/0536–1028–2019–6-98–107
9. Sosnina T. N. Cost: historical and methodological research. Training manual. Samara State Aerospace University. Samara, 2005. 435 p.
10. Kelemen E., García-Llorente M., Pataki G., Martín-López B., Gómez-Baggethun E. Non-monetary techniques for the valuation of ecosystem service. OpenNESS Ecosystem Services Reference Book. 2016.
11. Dumnov A. D., Fomenko G. A., Fomenko M. A. Ecosystem accounting as a further development of the system of integrated natural resource and economic accounting and SNA. Voprosy statistiki. 2015. No. 5. pp. 11–34.
12. Logvinenko O. A., Strovsky V. E. Natural resources from the position of accounting as a part of national wealth. News of the Ural State Mining University. 2019. Vol. 2(54). pp. 126–133. DOI: 10.21440/2307–2091–2019–2-126–133
13. The central basis of the System of Natural-Economic Accounting. New York : UN, 2012.
14. Schröter M., Marques A., Tobón W. et al. National ecosystem assessments in Europe: a review. BioScience. 2016. Vol. 66, No. 10. pp. 813–828.
15. Russia in numbers. 2018: Short statistical compendium. Moscow: Rosstat, 2018. 522 p.
16. How wealthy is Russia 2000–2017. Washington, DC : World Bank, 2019.
17. Hein L., Bagstad K., Edens B., Obst C., de Jong R., Lesschen J. P. Defining Ecosystem Assets for Natural Capital Accounting. PLoS ONE. 2016. Vol. 11(11). e0164460.
18. Lange G.-M., Wodon Q., Carey K. The Changing Wealth of Nations 2018 : Building a Sustainable Future. Washington DC: World Bank Group, 2018.
19. Zamolodchikov D. G., Grabovsky V. I., Kurts V. A. Managing the carbon balance of Russian forests: Past, present and future. Ustoichivoe lesopolzovanie. 2014. No. 2. pp. 23–31.
20. Dolman A. J., Shvidenko A., Schepaschenko D., Ciais P., Tchebakova N. et al. An estimate of the terrestrial carbon budget of Russia using inventory-based, eddy covariance and inversion method. Biogeosciences. 2012. Vol. 9. pp. 5323–5340.
21. Filipchuk A. N., Malysheva N. V., Moiseev B. N., Strakhov V. V. Analytical review of methods for emissions accounting and uptake of atmospheric greenhouse gases by forests. Lesokhozyaystvennaya informatsiya. 2016. No. 3. pp. 36–85.
22. Fomenko G. A., Fomenko M. A., Horoshkin K. A., Mikhailova A. V. Accounting and assessment of ecosystem services of Novokuznetsk coal-mining area (Kemerovo Region). Izvestiya RAN. Seriya geograficheskaya. 2019. No. 3. pp. 88–97.
23. Mensah J., Ricart Casadevall S. Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Social Sciences. 2019. Vol. 5(1). DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531