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

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.

A nonparametric random effects model for the valuation of forest recreation services: An application to forest sites in Tuscany, Italy

“…A possible explanation for such mixed results is that forest conservation interventions related to tourism and recreational activities are often implemented regardless of their economic and societal values (Austin et al., 2020; Elomina & Pülzl, 2021; Giergiczny et al., 2021; Scarpa, Chilton, & Hutchinson, 2000; Scarpa, Chilton, Hutchinson, & Buongiorno, 2000; Scarpa, Hutchinson, Chilton, & Buongiorno, 2000). Yet, forest recreation can be deemed a pivotal ecosystem service insofar as it provides a wide range of intangible benefits and cultural values to society, including social interaction, spiritual renewal and physical wellness (e.g., bird watching and hiking; see, for an overview, Berlinhn & Gómez‐Baggethun, 2021; Boncinelli et al., 2015; Brack, 2002; Brown et al., 2016; Dou et al., 2017; Ignatyeva et al., 2020; Jim & Chen, 2009; Lankia et al., 2015; MEA, 2005; Queiroz et al., 2015; Weller & Elasser, 2018). Further, recreational uses of forests are also seen as educational opportunities from which it is possible to increase the awareness of the general public towards the existing environmental issues (Immerzeel et al., 2022; Larson et al., 2016).…”

Valuating Natural Resources and Ecosystem Services: Systematic Review of Methods in Use

“…The classical stage (early 18th C.-early 19th C.) is characterized by the works of such titans of economic science as A. Smith, D. Ricardo, T. Malthus, and K. Marx, who addressed the question of the land's value and methods of its (value) assessment. The neoclassical stage, which began in the 19th century with works of K. Menger, S. Jevons, A. Marshall, R. Coase, and others, continues to this day by the elaboration of the evaluation theory and value theory of natural resources [2], employing and improving such concepts as ecosystem services [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13], total economic value [14][15][16][17][18][19], natural capital [20][21][22], and a range of biophysical approaches presented in the study [23]. However, despite the almost four-century history of evaluation theory's and value theory's elaboration, evaluation methods are still the subject of scientific disputes and research [23][24][25][26].…”

A Model for the Economic Evaluation of Cultural Ecosystem Services: The Recreational Hunting Function in the Agroforestry Territories of Tuscany (Italy)

“…The main international reports analysing the effects of ESs include the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) [3], the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) [4], and The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) [5]. According to a classification shared by these reports, ESs can be classified into three categories: provisioning ecosystem services, such as food and fresh water; regulating ecosystem services, which affect, for example, climate, floods and diseases; and cultural ecosystem services which include recreation and spiritual values [3,6].…”

“…Other authors have further differentiated these services [7]. For example, following a more economic approach based on Costanza and Daly's studies, Natural Capital is defined as the stock of natural resources, including recreational services, which they can draw on to ensure a flow of goods and services for future generations [6,8]. Additionally, CESs have also been defined as all spaces in the environment and all cultural practices that generate benefits for people [9].…”

“…Compulsory registration 4. For five hunting days in a regional THA different from those in which you are registered5 Costs defined on the basis of questionnaire responses 6. Proportional mileage costs[63].…”