The current state of knowledge of ecosystems and ecosystem services in Russia: A status report

Abstract

This paper focusses on a conceptual overview of ways to address a comprehensive analysis of ecosystem services (ES) in a country as large and heterogeneous as Russia. As a first step, a methodology for assessing the services for the federal subjects of Russia was chosen, i.e., its constituent provinces and similar entities, in physical terms. Russia harbors a great diversity of natural conditions and ecosystems which are suppliers of ES, and likewise a variety of the socio-economic conditions that shape the demand for these services and their consumption. The methodological approach described permits several important tasks to be addressed: the evaluation of the degree of satisfaction of people’s needs for ES, the identification of ecological donor and acceptor regions, and zoning of the country’s territory for ES assessment. The next step is to prepare a prototype of a National Report on ES in Russia, for which we are presenting the planned structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. Antipov, A.N., V.V. Kravchenko, Y.M. Semenov, et al. 2006. Landscape planning: Tools and experiences in implementation. Bonn: V.B. Sochava Institute of Geography SB RAS Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Author Collective. 2012. Rio 20+ and new possibilities. Newsletter Sustainable Russia No. 61, Civil Chamber, Moscow, Russia (in Russian, English summary).

  3. BAFU. 2011. Indicators of ecosystem services. Report published by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment FOEN, Bern, Switzerland (in German, English summary). Retrieved 1 December, 2012, from http://www.environment-switzerland.ch/uw-1102-e.

  4. Bagstad, K.J., D.J. Semmens, S. Waage, and R. Winthrop. 2013. A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation. Ecosystem Services 5: 27–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bartalev, S.A., A.S. Belvard, D.V. Ershov, and A.S. Isaev. 2004. Map of terrestrial ecosystems of the Northern Eurasia. Russian Academy of Sciences: Space Research Institute (Digital Map in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Bastian, O., K. Grunewald, and R.-U. Syrbe. 2012. Space and time aspects of ecosystem services, using the example of the European Water Framework Directive. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services and Management 8: 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bastian, O., K. Grunewald, and A.V. Khoroshev. 2015. The significance of geosystem and landscape concepts for the assessment of ecosystem services—Exemplified in a case study in Russia. Landscape Ecology. doi:10.1007/s10980-015-0200-x.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bazilevich, N. 1993. Biological productivity of Northern Eurasia ecosystems. Moscow: Science Publisher (in Russian, English summary).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Belelli Marchesini, L., D. Papale, M. Reichstein, N. Vuichard, N. Tchebakova, and R. Valentini. 2007. Carbon balance assessment of a natural steppe of southern Siberia by multiple constraint approach. Biogeosciences 4: 581–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bobylev, S.N., E.N. Bukvareva, V.I. Grabovsky, A.A. Danilkin, Y.Y. Dgebuadze, A.V. Drozdov, D.G. Zamolodchikov, H.N. Kraev, et al. 2014. Analysis of the current knowledge about ecosystems and ecosystem services in Russia—A status-quo report. In TEEB-processes and ecosystem-assessment in Germany, Russia and other countries of Northern Eurasia, ed. K. Grunewald, O. Bastian, and A. Drozdov, 162–235. Bonn: BfN-Skripten 372 (in Russian and in German).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bobylev, S.N., and V.M. Zakharov. 2009. Ecosystem services and economy. Moscow: Institute of Sustainable Development/Center for Russian Environmental Policy (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Boyd, J., and S. Banzhaf. 2007. What are ecosystem services? The need for standardized environmental accounting units. Ecological Economics 63: 616–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bukvareva, E.N. 2014. The global significance of Russian ecosystem functions and the problem of different scales of ecosystem services. In TEEB-processes and ecosystem-assessment in Germany, Russia and other countries of Northern Eurasia, ed. K. Grunewald, O. Bastian, and A. Drozdov, 92–125. Bonn: BfN-Skripten 372 (in Russian and in German).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bukvareva, E.N., and G.M. Alecshenko. 2013. The principle of the optimal diversity of biosystems. Moscow: KMK-Fellowship of Scientific Publications (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  15. CBD—Convention on Biological Biodiversity. 2010. Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. Montreal: CBD Secretariat.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Chen, Q., R. Zhu, Q. Wang, and H. Xu. 2014. Methane and nitrous oxide fluxes from four tundra ecotopes in Ny-Ålesund of the High Arctic. Journal of Environmental Sciences 26: 1403–1410.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chestnykh, O., D. Zamolodchikov, and D. Karelin. 1999. Resources of organic carbon in the soils of tundra and forest-tundra ecosystems in Russia. Russian Journal of Ecology 30: 392–398.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chichilnisky, G., and G. Heal. 1998. Economic returns from the biosphere. Nature 391: 629–630.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Costanza, R. 2008. Ecosystem services: Multiple classification systems are needed. Biological Conservation 141: 350–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Costanza, R., R. d’Arge, R. de Groot, S. Farber, M. Grasso, B. Hannon, K. Limburg, S. Naeem, et al. 1997. The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387: 253–260.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Costanza, R., and I. Kubishewski. 2012. The authorship structure of “ecosystem services” as a transdisciplinary field of scholarship. Ecosystem Services 1: 16–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Crowley, T.J. 2000. Causes of climate change over the past 1000 years. Science 289: 270–277.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Daily, G. (ed.). 1997. Nature’s services: Societal dependence on natural ecosystems. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Dolman, A.J., A. Shvidenko, D. Schepaschenko, P. Ciais, N. Tchebakova, T. Chen, M.K. van der Molen, L. Belelli Marchesini, et al. 2012. An estimate of the terrestrial carbon budget of Russia using inventory-based, eddy covariance and inversion method. Biogeosciences 9: 5323–5340. doi:10.5194/bg-9-5323-2012.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dyakonov, K.N. 2007. Landscape studies in Moscow Lomonosov University: Development of scientific domains and education. In Landscape analysis for sustainable development. Theory and applications of landscape science in Russia, ed. K.N. Dyakonov, N.S. Kasimov, A.V. Khoroshev, and A.V. Kushlin, 11–20. Moscow: Alex Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  26. DZZ. 2011. Ukraine and Russia—Agriculture in transition, dzz No. 4—July 2011. Retrieved 1 June, 2012, from http://www.club-aktiv.de/info.php?info_ID=201.

  27. Fisher, B., R.K. Turner, and P. Morling. 2009. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making. Ecological Economics 68: 643–653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Forest Report. 1996. Forest utilization in the Russian Federation, 1946–1992. Report, Moscow, Russia (in Russian).

  29. Goldman-Benner, R.L., S. Benitez, T. Boucher, A. Calbache, G. Daily, P. Kareiva, T. Kroeger, and A. Ramos. 2012. Water funds and payments for ecosystem services: Practice learns from theory and theory can learn from practice. Oryx 46: 55–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. de Groot, R.S. 1992. Functions of nature: Evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. Groningen: Wolters-Noordhoff.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Grunewald, K., and O. Bastian (eds.). 2015. Ecosystem services—Concept, methods and case studies. Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Grunewald, K., O. Bastian, and A. Drozdov (eds.). 2014a. TEEB-processes and ecosystem-assessment in Germany, Russia and other countries of Northern Eurasia. Bonn: BfN-Skripten 372 (in Russian and in German).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Grunewald, K., O. Bastian, A. Drozdov, and V. Grabowsky (eds.). 2014b. Ascertainment and assessment of ecosystem services (ES)—Experiences, especially from Germany and Russia. Bonn: BfN-Skripten 373 (in Russian and in German).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Haines-Young, R.H., and M.B. Potschin. 2010. Proposal for a common international classification of ecosystem goods and services (CICES) for integrated environmental and economic accounting (V1). Report to the European Environment Agency.

  35. Hartley, I.P., M.H. Garnett, M. Sommerkorn, D.W. Hopkins, B.J. Fletcher, V.L. Sloan, G.K. Phoenix, and P.A. Wookey. 2012. A potential loss of carbon associated with greater plant growth in the European Arctic. Nature Climate Change 2: 875–879. doi:10.1038/nclimate1575.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Heikkinen, J.E.P., T. Virtanen, J.T. Huttunen, V. Elsakov, and P.J. Martikainen. 2004. Carbon dioxide and methane dynamics and annual carbon balance in tundra wetland in NE Europe, Russia. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 18: GB1023. doi:10.1029/2003GB002054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Krever, V., M. Stishov, and I. Onufrenya. 2009. National protected areas of the Russian Federation: GAP-analysis and perspective framework. WWF-Russia, The Nature Conservancy. Moscow: MAVA.

  38. Kurganova, I.N., V.O. Lopes de Gerenyu, J. Six, and Y. Kuzyakov. 2014. Carbon cost of collective farming collapse in Russia. Global Change Biology 20: 938–947. doi:10.1111/gcb.12379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Lenton, T.M., H. Held, E. Kriegler, J.W. Hall, W. Lucht, S. Rahmstorf, and H.J. Schellnhuber. 2008. Tipping elements in the Earth’s climate system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105: 1786–1793.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Maes, J., A. Teller, M. Erhard, et al. 2014. Mapping and assessment of ecosystems and their services. Indicators for ecosystem assessment under Action 5 of the EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.

  41. MEA-Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005. Ecosystems and human well-being: Synthesis. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Merbold, L., W.L. Kutsch, C. Corradi, O. Kolle, C. Rebmann, P.C. Stoy, Z.A. Zimov, and E.-D. Schulze. 2009. Artificial drainage and associated carbon fluxes (CO2/CH4) in a tundra ecosystem. Global Change Biology 15: 2599–2614. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2426.2009.01962.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Minayeva, T., A. Sirin, and O. Bragg (eds.). 2009. A quick scan of peatlands in Central and Eastern Europe. Wageningen: Wetlands International.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Morozov, A. 2000. Survey of illegal forest felling activities in Russia (forms and methods of illegal cuttings). Moscow, Greenpeace Russia. Retrieved 1 July, 2014, from http://old.forest.ru/eng/publications/illegal/.

  45. NEESPI. 2004. The Northern Eurasia earth science partnership initiative. Science Plan. 3.1. Terrestrial Ecosystem Dynamics. Retrieved 12 October, 2014, from http://www.neespi.org/.

  46. NU-IHDP, and UNEP. 2014. Inclusive Wealth Report 2014. Measuring progress toward sustainability. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  47. Parish, F., A. Sirin, D. Charman, H. Joosten, T. Minayeva, M. Silvius, and L. Stringer (eds.). 2008. Assessment on peatlands, biodiversity and climate change: Main report. Wageningen: Global Environment Centre, Kuala Lumpur and Wetlands International.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Pavlov, D.S., and E.N. Bukvareva. 2012. Climate-regulating functions of terrestrial ecosystems and an “ecologocentric” concept of nature management. Biology Bulletin Reviews 2: 105–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Pavlov, D.S., B.R. Striganova, and E.N. Bukvareva. 2010. An environment-oriented concept of nature use. Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences 80: 74–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Potschin, M., and R. Haines-Young. 2011. Ecosystem services: Exploring a geographical perspective. Progress in Physical Geography 35: 575–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ptichnikov, A., and A. Kuritsyn. 2011. Systems of monitoring wood origins in Russia: Experience of timber companies and forest authorities. Analytical Report/WWF-Russia, Moscow (in Russian, English summary only on http://www.wwf.ru/resources/publ/book/eng/496).

  52. Ruckelshaus, M., E. McKenzie, H. Tallis, A. Guerry, G. Daily, P. Kareiva, S. Polasky, T. Ricketts, et al. 2013. Notes from the field: Lessons learned from using ecosystem service approaches to inform real-world decisions. Ecological Economics. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2013.07.009.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Salzman, J. 2005. Payments for ecosystem services. Notes from the field. New York University Law Review 80: 870.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Schröter, M., D.N. Barton, R.P. Remme, and L. Hein. 2014. Accounting for capacity and flow of ecosystem services: A conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecological Indicators 36: 539–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Sirin, A., T. Minayeva, A. Vozbrannaya, and S. Bartalev. 2011. How to escape from peat fires? Science in Russia 2: 13–21 (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Smelyanskiy, I. 2012. The role of Russian steppe ecosystems in carbon deposition. Steppe Bulletin 35: 4–8 (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  57. Smelansky, I., and A. Tishkov. 2012. The Steppe biome in Russia: Ecosystem services, conservation status, and actual challenges. In Eurasian Steppes. Ecological problems and livelihoods in a changing world, 45–102. New York: Springer.

  58. Smith, L.C., G.M. MacDonald, A.A. Velichko, et al. 2004. Siberian peatlands a net carbon sink and global methane source since the early Holocene. Science 303: 353–356.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Sohngen, B., K. Andrasko, M. Gytarsky, et al. 2005. Stocks and flows. Carbon inventory and mitigation potential of the Russian forest and land base. World Resources Institute. Retrieved from http://pubs.wri.org.

  60. Syrbe, R.-U., and U. Walz. 2012. Spatial relations and structural indicators for ecosystem services. Ecological Indicators 21: 80–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. TEEB—The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. 2013. Guidance manual for TEEB country studies. Version 1.0.

  62. Tishkov, A.A. 2005. Biosphere functions of natural ecosystems in Russia. Moscow: Nauka (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  63. UNDP. 2010. Millennium development goals in Russia: Looking into the future. National Human Development Report for the Russian Federation, ed. S. Bobylev, Moscow, Russia.

  64. UNDP. 2011. Modernization and human development. National Human Development Report for the Russian Federation, ed. S. Bobylev, Moscow, Russia.

  65. Wende, W., W. Wojtkiewicz, I. Marschall, S. Heiland, T. Lipp, M. Reinke, P. Schaal, and C. Schmidt. 2012. Putting the plan into practice: Implementation of proposals for measures of local landscape plans. Landscape Research 37: 483–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wooller, M., J. Pohlman, B. Gaglioti, P. Langdon, M. Jones, K. Walter Anthony, K. Becker, K.U. Hinrichs, et al. 2012. Reconstruction of past methane availability in an Arctic Alaska wetland indicates climate influenced methane release during the past ~12,000 years. Journal of Paleolimnology 48: 27–42. doi:10.1007/s10933-012-9591-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Yablokov, A.V. 2010. The environment and politics in Russia. Russian Analytical Digest 79/10. Retrieved 7 November, 2014, from http://www.laender-analysen.de/russland/rad/pdf/Russian_Analytical_Digest_79.pdf.

  68. Zakharov, V. (ed.). 2011. Towards a sustainable Russia, 2009–2011. Moscow: Institute of Sustainable Development, Civic Chamber of the Russian Federation (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  69. Zamolodchikov, D.G., and D. Karelin. 2001. An empirical model of carbon fluxes in Russian tundra. Global Change Biology 7: 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Zamolodchikov, D.G., A.I. Utkin, G.N. Korovin, and O.V. Chestnykh. 2005. Dynamics of carbon pools and fluxes in Russia’s forest lands. Russian Journal of Ecology 36: 291–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Zamolodchikov, D.G., V.I. Grabovskii, and G.N. Kraev. 2011. 20 Years retrospective forest carbon dynamics in Russia. Contemporary Problems of Ecology 4: 706–715. doi:10.1134/S1995425511070022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Zamolodchikov, D.G. 2012. The dynamics of the carbon balance of forests of Russia and its contribution to the change in atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide—Use and protection of natural resource of Russia. Scientific, Informative and Analytical Bulletin 5: 31–38 (in Russian).

    Google Scholar 

  73. Zavarzin, G.A., and V.N. Kudeyarov. 2006. Soils as the main source of carbon dioxide and a reservoir of organic carbon in Russia). Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences 76: 14–29 (in Russian).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The following Russian colleagues helped prepare the initial draft of the Status Quo Report: Oleg F. Filenko, Vasiliy I. Grabovskiy, Aleksey A. Danilkin, Yury Y. Dgebuadze, Alexander V. Drozdov, Alexander V. Khoroshev, Gleb N. Kraev, Ilya N. Mordvintsev, Bella R. Striganova, Arkady A. Tishkov, and Armen R. Grigoryan. The German–Russian Project “Ecosystem Services Evaluation in Russia and other NIS Countries of Northern Eurasia: First Steps” is sponsored by the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN), with funds from the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB). We are particularly grateful to Heinrich Schmauder and Jürgen Nauber (BfN) for their commitment to the project, and three unknown reviewers for their advice, as well as to Phil Hill († 22. Dec. 2014), Berlin, for polishing the language.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karsten Grunewald.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bukvareva, E.N., Grunewald, K., Bobylev, S.N. et al. The current state of knowledge of ecosystems and ecosystem services in Russia: A status report. Ambio 44, 491–507 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0674-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Biodiversity
  • Climate regulation
  • Ecosystem functioning
  • Environment
  • National ecosystem assessment
  • Russia