Abstract

The aim of the article. The aim of the article is to study the problems of funding conservation of wetlands ecosystem services and search of organizational and economic management tools of ecosystem services, which can be implemented in Ukraine. The results of the analysis. Summary of world practice implementation of organizational and economic management tools, based on payments for wetlands ecosystem services, determine the following basic principles of their formation: 1) enter into an agreement with stakeholders payment for ecosystem services on a voluntary basis; 2) payment perform beneficiaries of ecosystem services; 3) payments are made directly to providers of ecosystem services; 4) ecosystem value should prevail over the market interests of the ecosystem services provider; 5) payment is usually carried out by a wetland ecosystem services, although, in some cases, for receiving payments may be to force a certain way of land use, etc. The author generalized and systematized modern tools that are used to manage wetlands ecosystem services. Therefore, the author proposed to allocate financial and organizational tools of ecosystem services management into separate groups. Moreover, financial instruments can be divided into public and private (or voluntary). The government funding instruments primarily include national (local) target program and budget, reduced taxes, duties and tariffs, government guarantees of financial transactions of wetland ecosystem services and securitization, joint financing, credit and deposit activities on wetland ecosystem services, etc. Conclusions and directions of further researches. In Ukraine the formation of organizational and economic tools of wetlands ecosystem services managing which is based primarily on a system of payments for ecosystem services needs to take into account the following measures: conducting thorough strategic research and applied ecological, economic and other sectorial studies, conducting systematic inventory of wetland and identifying lists of ecosystem services, development of long-term national and regional strategies of recovery, support regulation of the wetlands ecosystem functions, development and formation of the national register of ecosystem services (state and local), the introduction of a pilot practice of payments for ecosystem services; application the practice of the inter-territorial (domestic) offsets and compensation on the conservation, restoration, support ecosystem services, development and improvement of methodologies to assess the economic value of ecosystem services for different types of economic activity in view of the nature of territorial characteristics of Ukraine, formation of regional balance of the wetlands ecosystem services and identifying of «donor regions» and «acceptor regions» of different types of the wetlands ecosystem services in Ukraine, strengthening the regulatory framework of formation of payments and markets of ecosystem services.  

Keywords: ecosystem services, wetlands, market of ecosystem services, payments for ecosystem services, wetland banking

JEL Classification: Q34, Q50, Q57.

Cite as: Degtyar, N. (2013). Funding and stimulation mechanisms of the wetlands` ecosystem services conservation. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 314-325. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2013.4-30

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Bambiza, N.N. (2009). Ekonomicheskii mekhanizm sokhraneniia bioraznoobraziia GPU «Natsionalnyi park «Belovezhskaia pushcha» [The economic mechanism for the conservation of biodiversity of the SEA «National Park» Belovezhskaia Pushcha»] Candidate’s thesis. Minsk [in Russian].
2. Bobylev, S.N., & Zakharov, V.M. (2009). Ekosistemnye usluhi i ekonomika [Ecosystem services and the economy]. Moscow: Tipohrafiia LEVKO [in Russian].
3. Bukvareva, E.N. (2010). Rol nazemnykh ecosystem v rehuliatsii klimata i mesto Rossii v postkiotskom protsesse [The role of terrestrial ecosystems in regulating climate and the place of Russia in the post-Kyoto process]. Moscow: Tovarishchestvo nauchnykh izdaniy KMK [in Russian].
4. Hlazyrina, I.P (2001). Prirodnyi kapital v ekonomike perekhodnoho perioda [Natural capital in the economy of the transition period]. Moscow: NIA Priroda [in Russian].
5. Dehtiar, N.V., & Pavliuk, K.V. (2012). Publichno-pryvatne partnerstvo yak mekhanizm staloho vykorystannia ta zberezhennia ecosystem [Public-private partnerships as a mechanism for sustainable use and conservation of ecosystems]. Finansy Ukrayiny – Finance of Ukraine, 9, 59-71 [in Ukrainian].
6. Kotko, A.A. (2009). Vkliuchenie ekosistemnykh usluh v ekonomicheskie otnosheniia [The inclusion of ecosystem services in economic relations]. Izvestiia RAN, Seriia heohraficheskaia – Izvestiia of Russian Academy of Sciences, Geographical Series, 4, 78-85 [in Russian].
7. Krasnopolskii, B.Kh. (2008). Hosudarstvenno-obshchestvennoe partnerstvo v sfere prirodopolzovaniia [State and public partnership in sphere of nature management]. Moscow. Retrieved from http://ncosupport.ru/info/krasnopol.pdf [in Russian].
8. Mishenin, E.V., & Dehtiar, N.V. (2010). Rozvytok rynku ekosystemnykh posluh yak napriamok postkryzovoho zrostannia ekonomiky Ukrainy [Development of the ecosystem services market as the direction of the post-crisis economic growth in Ukraine]. Mekhanizm Rehuliuvannia Ekonomiky – Mechanism of Economic Regulation, V. 3, 3, 104-116 [in Ukrainian].
9. Neverov, A.V., Dereviaho, I.P., & Neverov, D.A. (2010). Ekolohicheskii kapital: soderzhanie i teoriia vosproizvodstva [Environmental capital: content and theory of reproduction]. Mekhanizm Rehulirovaniya Ekonomiky – Mechanism of Economic Regulation, 3, 1, 7-9 [in Russian].
10. Perelet, R.A. (n.d.). Platezhy za ekosistemnye usluhi: teoriia, metodolohiia i zarubezhnyi opyt prakticheskoho ispolzovaniia [Payments for ecosystem services: theory, methodology, and foreign experience of practical use]. wildnet.ru. Retrieved from http://wildnet.ru/images/stories/bibl/ economy_of_OOPT/Plateji.pdf [in Russian].
11. Rubel, O.E. (2009). Ekonolohiia vetlandov [Econology of wetlands]. Kishinev: Eco-TIRAS [in Russian].
12. Sotnik, I.N., & Mohilenets, T.V. (2011). Analiz podhodov k ekonomicheskoi otsenke ekosistemnykh usluh [Analysis of ecosystem services economical valuation approaches]. Mekhanizm Rehulirovaniia Ekonomiky – Mechanism of Economic Regulation, 2, 152-158 [in Russian].
13. Treller, J. (2010). Obshchii obzor mezhdunarodnykh podhodov i metodov vzaimodeistviia orhanizatsii hosudarstvennoho i chastnoho sektorov v issleduemoi oblasti (na territorii OOPT) [An overview of international approaches and methods of cooperation between public and private sectors in the study area (for PAs)]. Syktyvkar. Retrieved from http://www.undp-komi.org/images/pdf/reports/report_treller-ppp-p1ru.pdf [in Russian].
14. Uliukaev, S. (n.d.). Sekiuritizatsiia aktivov i sekiuritizatsiia bankovskikh aktivov: kak otlichat, ponimat, traktovat [Securitization of assets and securitization of bank assets: how to distinguish, understand and interpret]. Ekonomicheskii portal – ekonomika Rossii i mirovaia ekonomika – Economic Portal – Russia’s economy and the world economy. Retrieved from http://institutiones.com/investments/ 1678-sekyuritizaciya-bankovskix-aktivov.html [in Russian].
15. Lukianchikov, N.N, & Potravnyi, I.M. (2012). Ekonomika i orhanizatsiia prirodopolzovaniia [Economy and organization of nature management]. Moscow: UNITY-DANA [in Russian].
16. Bishop J. (2009). New business models for biodiversity conservation. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 28, 285-303 [in English].
17. Costanza, R. (2008). Ecosystem services: multiple classification systems are needed. Biological Conservation, 141, 350-352 [in English].
18. Іnnovative marketsand market‐like instruments for ecosystem services: the matrix (2012). A forest trends initiative. ecosystemmarketplace.com. Retrieved from http://www.ecosystemmarketplace. com/documents/acrobat/the_matrix.pdf [in English].
19. Pagiola, S. (2008). Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics, 65, 712-724 [in English].
20. Rowcroft P., Smith, S., Rowcroft, P., Clarke, L., Thomson, K.J., & Reed, M. (2011). Barriers and opportunities to the use of payments for ecosystem services. Final Report. URS Scott Wilson Ltd. London. Retrieved from http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Document.aspx?Document=PESFinalReport28 September2011%28FINAL%29.pdf [in English].
21. Summary Data Reports. (n.d.). worldbank.org. Retrieved from http://ppi.worldbank.org/ explore/Report.aspx?mode=1 [in English].
22. US Wetland and Stream Bank Dataset and Analysis. (n.d.). speciesbanking.com. Retrieved from http://www.speciesbanking.com/pages/us_wetland_stream_banks [in English].