NATURE MANAGEMENT CONFLICTS IN THE CONTEXT OF LOSS OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

  • O.P. Havrylenko
Keywords: ecosystem services, conflicts of nature management, degradation, biodiversity, protected areas

Abstract

Ecosystem services, important for the society welfare, are degraded and lost due to irrational nature using and excessive exploitation of the planet resources. The close relationship between different types of nature management on the mutual territory is caused by the ever-increasing needs in natural resources, the complication of production and the reduction of territories suitable for development. In addition, conflicts between different land users often arise, which are exacerbated by competition for resources, territory and the possibility of obtaining quality ecosystem services. The most conflictual are industrial and transport types of nature management, which expand the area and the intensity of impact on the natural environment. Most often conflict situations arise between land users within the same river basin, who share water resources. Conflicts caused by the deterioration of air quality are most pronounced in urbanized areas where the main sources of pollution are located and the population is concentrated as the main recipient of contaminated air. Conflicts due to competition over the territory are inevitable between agrarian and forestry nature management, because they are the main consumers of soil resources. Large-scale deforestation is the main cause of forest conflicts among many interested land users. Mining and processing industries are in conflict with virtually all types of natural management in the adjacent territories, where irreversible lands violations, pollution of all landscape components, and dangerous exogenous processes are happening.

Most diverse ecosystem services for mankind are provided by protected areas, where the main conflicts of nature management are associated with excessive recreational loads, garbage accumulation, poaching, penetration of invasive species, illegal building. The largest losses of ecosystem services occur in protected areas located within large cities. Considering the significant damage from degradation and loss of ecosystem services, society must be aware of the benefits of avoiding conflict situations, which will contribute to the timely prevention of the degradation of vital ecosystem services. Inventory and assess the benefits derived from ecosystems will help to stimulate ecosystem services consumers to preserve the natural environment.

References

1. Василюк, О.В. (2018). Національний природний парк «Голосіївський» [Vasylyuk, O.V. (2018). National natural park «Holosiyivskyi» (In Ukrainian)]. doi: http://epl.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/ Goloseevo_booklet_A5_web_razv1.pdf (дата звернення: 31.03.2019).
2. Гавриленко, О.П., & Циганок, Є.Ю. (2018). Деградація екосистемних послуг природоохоронних територій в урбанізованих зонах. Вісник Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. Серія: Географія, 4(73), 10–14. [Havrylenko, O.P., & Tsyhanok, Ye.Yu. (2018). Degradation of ecosystem services of protected areas in urbanized zones. Visnyk Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Geography, 4(73), 10–14. (In Ukrainian)]. doi:10.17721/1728-2721.2019.73.2.
3. Мішенін, Є.В., & Дегтярь, Н.В. (2015). Економіка екосистемних послуг: теоретико-методологічні основи. Маркетинг і менеджмент інновацій, 2, 243– 257. [Mishenin, Ye.V., & Degtyar, N.V. (2015). Economics of ecosystem services: theoretical and methodological foundations. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 243–257. (In Ukrainian)].
4. Про Основні засади (стратегію) державної екологічної політики України на період до 2030 року. № 2697-VIII розд. VI. (2019). [About the Basic Principles (Strategy) of the State Environmental Policy of Ukraine for the period up to 2030. No. 2697- VIII. Sec. VI. (2019). (In Ukrainian)].
5. Сабадаш, В.В. (2010). Екологічні конфлікти: теоретико-методологічні аспекти еколого-економічного дослідження. [Sabadash, V.V. (2010). Environmental conflicts: theoretical and methodological aspects of ecological and economic research. (In Ukrainian)]. doi: http://r250.sudu.edu.ua/bitstream/123456789/3313/1/ sabadash_methodology-EK-2010.pdf (дата звернення: 13.04.2019).
6. Brown, T., Веrgstrom, J., & Loomis, J. (2007). Defining, valuing and providing ecosystem goods and services. Natural Resources Journal, 47(2), 329–376.
7. Costanza, R., d’Arge, R., de Groot, R., Farberk, S., Grasso, M., Hannon, B., … & van den Belt, M. (1997). The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature, 387, 253–260.
8. Costanza, R., de Groot, R., Sutton, P., van der Ploeg, S., Anderson, S.J., Kubiszewski, I., ... & Turner, R.K. (2014). Changes in the global value of ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change, 26, 152–158.
9. Haines-Young, R. & Potschin, M. (2013). Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August- December 2012. EEA Framework Contract No EEA/ IEA/09/003. doi: https://cices.eu/content/uploads/ sites/8/2012/07/CICES-V43_Revised-Final_ Report_29012013.pdf (дата звернення: 28.04.2019).
10. Kumar, P. (Ed.). (2010). The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB). Ecological and Economic Foundations. London and Washington : Earthscan.
11. Living Planet Report 2018: Aiming Higher (2018). doi: https://c402277.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/ publications/1187/files/original/LPR2018_Full_ Report_Spreads.pdf (дата звернення: 28.05.2019).
12. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report (2005). doi: http://pdf.wri.org/mea_ synthesis_030105.pdf.
13. Study of Critical Environmental Problems (SCEP). Man’s Impact on the Global Environment (1970). doi: https://mitpress.mit.edu/contributors/ study-critical-environmental-problems-scep (дата звернення: 15.05.2019).
14. Schumacher, E.F. (1973). Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics as If People Mattered. London : Blond & Briggs.
Published
2019-09-13
Pages
101-106
Section
SECTION 2 NATURAL-GEOGRAPHICAL AND ECOLOGICAL RESEARCHES