УДК 330.5

https://doi.org/10.21440/2307-2091-2019-2-126-133

O. A. Logvinenko, V. E. Strovskiy / News of the Ural State Mining University. 2019. Issue 2(54), pp. 126-133

Relevance. At all times national wealth played the role of the most important indicator of the economic situation of a state. From this point of view, the completeness and accuracy of the assessment of its magnitude continues to be an actual research task to this day. Purpose of research. Identifying evolutionary changes in the mapping of national wealth from the perspective of its natural resources.
Research results. The absence of a unified approach to the concept of national wealth in the world community has been proved. The content of methods for assessing national wealth has been disclosed since the late 1960s, when the UN approved the methodology recommended for many countries around the world. Some evolutionary changes in the methods of assessing national wealth were reflected. Particular attention is paid to the accounting of natural resources. In the agrarian economy, land (arable land, forest) acted as an element of national wealth, while its value was expressed in the form of the value of agricultural land. In the industrial economy, arable land, forest, and mineral resources as sources of raw materials were subject to monetary recording. And finally, in the post-industrial economy, the task of recording of natural capital as part of the national wealth is taking account; it is considered as a combination of natural resources and ecosystem services. Becoming economic assets and bringing certain benefits, natural resources and ecosystem services (ecological resources), transforming into the concept of natural capital, have a significant impact on the amount of a country’s national wealth. The lack of sufficient experience, the complexity of the economic assessment of natural capital does not allow for an objective valuation of national wealth.
Conclusion. The valuation of natural capital in the composition of national wealth should be one of the priorities of Russian statistics. The concept of total economic value should be considered the most promising for assessing natural capital; it allows to take into account not only the cost of using resources but also the cost of existence, which is extremely important in the framework of the concept of sustainable development of the economy, in order to preserve natural wealth for future generations.

Keywords: national wealth, valuation, land, natural resources, natural capital, evolutionary changes.

REFERENCES

1. Smolina E. E., Osadchaya T. G. 2006, To the question of the essence of national wealth. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskiye yavleniya i protsessy [Social and Economic Phenomena and Processes], no. 1/2, pp. 134–139. (In Russ.)
2. Grigorieva N. V. Issues of the study of national wealth as an economic category. Vestnik CHGU [Bulletin of the Cherepovets State University]. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/voprosy-metodologii-issledovaniya-natsionalnogo-bogatstva-kak-ekonomicheskoy-kategorii
3. Girbasova E. M. 2014, Features of the current stage of development of the system of national accounts in Russia. Ekonomicheskiye i Sotsial’nogumanitarnyye issledovaniya [Economic and Social Research], pp. 12–22. (In Russ.)
4. Grigorieva E. А. 2016, Statistical approaches to the assessment of national wealth in Russia. Ekonomika i predprinimatel’stvo [Economy and entrepreneurship], no. 6, pp. 816–820. (In Russ.)
5. Raskina Yu. V. 2010, Statistika prirodnykh resursov kak chasti natsional’nogo bogatstva [Statistics of natural resources as part of national wealth]. Saint-Petersburg, 23 p.
6. 2009, System of national accounts 2008. Commission of the European Communities, International Monetary Fund, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, UN, World Bank. N. Y., 1235 p. 
7. Paskhaver D. V. 1991, Statistiko-ekonomicheskiy analiz natsional’nogo bogatstva i proizvodstvennogo potentsiala SSSR [Statistical and economic analysis of the national wealth and production potential of the USSR], PhD thesis, 08.00.11. Kiev, 181 p.
8. 2018, Russia in numbers. 2018: statistical book. Rosstat. Мoscow, 522 p.
9. Costanza R., Daly H. Е. 1992, Natural capital and sustainable development. Conservation Biology, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 37–46. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1992.610037.x
10. Missemer A. 2018, Natural Capital as an Economic Concept, History and Contemporary. Ecological Economics, vol. 143, pp. 90–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.07.011
11. Lyapina A. А. 2016, Development of satellite accounts for the analysis of socio-economic development. Voprosy statistiki [Bulletin of Statistics], pp. 24–31. (In Russ.)
12. Ochuodho T. O., Alavalapati J. R. R. 2016, Integrating natural capital into system of national accounts for policy analysis: An application of a computable general equilibrium model. Forest Policy and Economics, vol. 72, pp. 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2016.06.020
13. Kostina E. N. 2010, International experience in integrating environmental statistics into national accounting. Vestnik OGU [Vestnik of the Orenburg State University], no. 8 (114), pp. 183–189. (In Russ.)
14. 2017, The central basis of the System of Natural-Economic Accounting, 2012. New York: UN.
15. Dumnov A. D., Fomenko G. A., Fomenko M. A. 2015, Ecosystem accounting as a further development of the system of integrated natural resource and economic accounting and the SNA. Voprosy statistiki [Bulletin of Statistics], no. 5, pp. 11–34. (In Russ.)
16. Hanley N., Dupuy L., McLaughlin E. 2015, Genuine savings and sustainability. Journal of Economic Surveys, vol. 29(4), pp. 779–806. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12120 
17. 2014, Diversifi ed development: optimal use of natural resources in the Eurasian region. Washington: World Bank, p. 122.
18. Zaitseva A. N., Prikhodko A. V. 2013, The evolution of the content of the category “national wealth” in the history of the development of economic thought. Vestnik TyumGU [Bulletin of the Tyumen State University], no. 11, pp. 56–64. (In Russ.)
19. Pearce D. W., Warford J. W. 1993, World Without End: Economics, Environment, and Sustainable Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 139–143.
20. Schröter M., Barton D. N., Remme R. P., Hein L. 2014, Accounting for capacity and fl ow of ecosystem services: A conceptual model and a case study for Telemark, Norway. Ecological Indicators, vol. 36, pp. 539–551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.09.018
21. La Notte A., Dalmazzone S. 2018, Sustainability assessment and causality nexus through ecosystem service accounting: The case of water purifi cation in Europe. Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 223, pp. 964–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.072
22. Goldenberg I. А. 2006, Estimation of the value of natural resources in the system of national accounts: problems and experience of statistical calculations. Problemy prognozirovaniya [Forecasting issues], no. 5, pp. 33–46. (In Russ.)
23. Droste N., Bartkowski B. 2018, Ecosystem Service Valuation for National Accounting: A Reply to Obst, Hein and Edens (2016). Environmental and Resource Economics, vol. 71(1), pp. 205–215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-017-0146-3