Ecological-economic assessment of environmental quality as a natural basis for territorial sustainable development: conceptual-categorical analysis

In the context of growing global problems of resource using and environmental protection the development of a sustainable environmental-economic development strategy, including at the territorial level is becoming increasingly actual. The purpose of the research is conceptual-categorical analysis of ecological-economic assessment of environmental quality as a natural basis for territorial systems of different levels sustainable development, elaboration and justification of the conceptual assessment model and methods of its implementation. Methodological issues focus on how to comprehensively assess the environmental quality of the territory and how this assessment can be taken into account in the formation of a strategy for environmentally sustainable development of spatial-economic systems. The scientific novelty of the research results lies in the consolidation of the theories of territorial development sustainability and environmental quality environmental-economic assessment in the conceptual model, as well as in the substantiation of tools for quantitative measurement of environmental quality, increasing the accuracy and reliability of the obtained environmental-economic assessments. The significance of the research results lies in providing decision-makers with comprehensive information on the long-term consequences of environmental-economic decisions and facilitating the transition to environmentally sustainable economic development of territories. This information can be obtained as a result of systematic application of multidimensional environmental-economic assessment tools that take into account not only the full socio-economic value of natural environmental resources, but also the spatial characteristics of territories.

1. Zhang, L., Xu, M., Chen, H., Li, Y., Chen, S. Globalization, Green Economy and Environmental Challenges: State of the Art Review for Practical Implications. Frontiers in Environmental Science. 2022; 10 DOI: 10.3389/fenvs.2022.870271. Retrieved from: https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/environmentalscience/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2022.870271/full (Accessed 10 May 2024)

2. Lazareva E.I. Ecological parametrization of trajectories of integration-cluster regional policy of innovative growth. Economics of Nature using. 2008; 3: 69-77.

3. Lazareva, E., Karaycheva, O. Natural Capital from the "Green" Economy of Sustainable Innovation Development Perspective Managing Identification: an Instrumental View. SGEM 2018 Conference proceedings. 2018. P. 693-700. DOI: 10.5593/sgemsocial2018/1.3/S04.085

4. Rao, C., Yan, B. Studyon the interactive influence between economic growth and environmental pollution. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 2020; 27: 39442-39465. DOI: 10.1007/s11356-020-10017-6

5. Lazareva, E., Anopchenko, T., Murzin, A. Human Capital in the System of Urban Territory Sustainable Development Management. Green Technologies and Infrastructure to Enhance Urban Ecosystem Services: Proceedings of the Smart and Sustainable Cities Conference 2018. Cham, 2020. P. 269-277.

6. Peña, C., Civit, B., Gallego-Schmid, A. et al. Using life cycle assessment to achieve a circular economy. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2021; 26: 215-220. DOI: 10.1007/s11367-020-01856-z

7. Libin, Ni., Lazareva, E.I. The Strategy of Environmental Protection of Chinese Regions in the Context of Achieving Sustainable Development Goals. Bulletinof Higher Education Institutes. Northern-Caucasus Region. Social Sciences. 2022; 2 (214): 112-119.

8. Bishop, K.C., Kuminoff, N.V., Banzhaf, H.S. et al. Best Practices for Using Hedonic Property Value Models to Measure Willingness to Pay for Environmental Quality. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy. 2020; 14: 260-281. DOI: 10.1093/reep/reaa00

9. Chu, X., Zhan, J., Wang, C., et al. Households’ Willingness to Accept Improved Ecosystem Services and Influencing Factors: Application of Contingent Valuation Method in Bashang Plateau, Hebei Province, China. Journal of Environmental Management. 2020; 255: 109925. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109925

10. Petcharat, A., Lee, Y., Chang, J.B. Choice Experiments for Estimating the Non-Market Value of Ecosystem Services in the Bang Kachao Green Area, Thailand. Sustainability. 2020; 12: 7637. DOI: 10.3390/su12187637

11. Moghaddam, H.K., Banihabib, M.E., Javadi, S., Randhir, T.O. A framework for the assessment of qualitative and quantitative sustainable development of groundwater system. Sustainable Development. 2021; 29: 10961110. DOI: 10.1002/sd.2205

12. Jiang, X., Li, G., Fu, W. Government environmental governance, structural adjustment and air quality: A quasi-natural experiment based on the Three-year Action Plan to Win the Blue Sky Defense War. Journal of Environmental Management. 2021; 277: 111470. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111470

13. Stratoulias, D., Nuthammachot, N. Air quality development during the COVID-19 pandemic over a medium-sized urban area in Thailand. Science of the Total Environment. 2020; 746: DOI: 141320. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141320

14. Bennett, E.M., Peterson, G.D., Gordon, L.J. Understanding relationships among multiple ecosystem services. Ecology Letters. 2009; 12: 1394-1404. DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01387.

15. Purvis, B., Mao, Y., Robinson, D. Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins. Sustainability Science. 2019; 14: 681-695. DOI: 10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5

16. Hák, T., Janoušková, S., Moldan, B. Sustainable Development Goals: A need for relevant indicators. Ecological Indicators. 2016; 60: 565-573. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2015.08.003