Modeling the interface between the social geosystem and the environment

Tolstoguzov, Oleg and Belykh, Anastasia (2022): Modeling the interface between the social geosystem and the environment. Published in: KnE Social Sciences No. Integration Processes in the Russian and International Research Domain: Experience and Prospects (11 February 2022): pp. 12-28.

Abstract

This article deals with the context of a new rationality in modeling due to the climate agenda and the introduction of ESG-type principles. We studied a geosystem with homogeneous natural-territorial complexes with the same geological basement, mesoforms of relief and industrial-territorial complexes. They function in a unified institutional climate. In this case, the focus is on the mesoscale of systems. The institutional order is based on the relationship between private and general institutions, and on organizational features of regions. The Dixit-Stiglitz monopolistic competition model is used to account for financial performance and utility in an equilibrium industry with high nature intensity. What is new is the introduction of the concept of social brands associated with ecosystem services and used simultaneously to account for the utility and customization of the new economic order, as well as the introduction of a social discount rate (a discount factor). Social brands create a certain “green” meaningful context in relation to natural capital and acting brands through social platforms. Thus, the society, through the mechanism of social brands, is offered a new format of interactions in which the structure of social brands becomes a priority in relation to the productive structure of the economy.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: climate agenda; natural and social geosystems; utility; social discount; social brand
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q56 - Environment and Development ; Environment and Trade ; Sustainability ; Environmental Accounts and Accounting ; Environmental Equity ; Population Growth; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q57 - Ecological Economics: Ecosystem Services ; Biodiversity Conservation ; Bioeconomics ; Industrial Ecology; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R5 - Regional Government Analysis > R58 - Regional Development Planning and Policy

References

UNEP. Decoupling Natural Resource use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth. Retrieved from https://www.unep.org/resources/report/decoupling-natural-resource-use-and-environmental-impacts-economic-growth (accessed: 09.10.2020).

Quillérou, E., Thomas, R. (2012) Costs of land degradation and benefits of land restoration: a review of valuation methods and suggested frameworks for inclusion into policy-making. CAB Review, No. 7(060), pp. 1-12.

Conrad, E., Cassar, L.F. (2014) Decoupling Economic Growth and Environmental Degradation: Reviewing Progress to Date in the Small Island State of Malta. Sustainability, No. 6, pp. 6729-6750.

Eurostat (2014) Recommendations of the Conference of European statisticians for measuring sustainable development. United Nations. New York and Geneva: Organization for economic cooperation and development and the statistical service of the European Union

OECD (2002) Indicators to Measure Decoupling of Environmental Pressure from Economic Growth. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/publicdisplaydocumentpdf/ ?cote=sg/sd(2002)1/final&doclanguage=en (accessed: 02.09.2020).

Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., Fitoussi, J.P. (2009) Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Eco-nomic Performance and Social Progress. Retrieved from https://www. re-searchgate.net/publication/258260767_Report_of_the_Commission_on_the_Measurement_of_Economic_Performance_and_Social_Progress_CMEPSP (accessed: 09.10.2020).

UNEP. (2005) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems and Human Well-being. Washing-ton DC: Island Press

The System of Environmental-Economic Accounting 2012. Central Framework. (2014) The United Nations, the European Commission, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, the International Mon-etary Fund, the World Bank Group

Nkonya, E. et al.(2016) Global cost of land degradation in Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement. Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement – A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development, pp. 117-165

Nkonya, E. et al. (2016) Concepts and Methods of Global Assessment of the Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement. Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement – A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development, pp.15-32

von Braun, J., Gerber, N., Mirzabaev, A., Nkonya, E. (2013) The Economics of Land Degrada-tion. ZEF Working Paper, No. 109, p. 35

Sochava, B.V. (1978) An introduction to the Theory of Geosystems. Novosibirsk: Nauka Press.

Kirdina, S. G. (2016) Methodological institutionalism as a new principle of complex social sys-tems analysis at meso-level. Terra Economicus, vol. 14, issue 1, p. 98-108

Kirdina-Chandler, S., Maevsky, V. (2020) Evolution of heterodox mesoeconomics. Terra Eco-nomicus, vol. 18, issue 3, p. 30-52

Shastitko, A. E. (2019) Meso-institutions: multiplication of entities or development of an eco-nomic research programme? Economic issues, No. 5, p. 5-25

Dopfer, K., Foster, J., Potts, J. (2004) Micro–meso–macro. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, vol. 14(3), pp. 263-279

Dopfer, K. (2011) Mesoeconomics: A Unified Approach to Systems Complexity and Evolu-tion. Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, No. 13391

Dopfer, K. (2012) The origins of meso economics. Schumpeter’s legacy and beyond. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, No 22(1), p. 133-160

Elsner, W. (2010) The Process and a Simple Logic of ‘Meso’. Emergence and the Coevolution of Institutions and Group Size. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, vol. 20 (3), p. 445-477.

Menard, C. (2014) Embedding organizational arrangements: towards a general model. Journal of Institutional Economics, No. 10(4), p. 567-589

Hassink, R., Isaksen, A., Trippl, M. (2019) Towards a comprehensive understanding of new regional industrial path development. Regional Studies, No. 11, p. 1636-1645

Isaksen, A., Trippl, M. (2017) Exogenously led and policy-supported new path development in peripheral regions: Analytical and synthetic routes. Economic Geography, No. 93(5), p. 436-457

Dixit, A., Stiglitz, J. (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. American Economic Review, p. 297-308

Krugman, P. (1979) Increasing Returns, Monopolistic Competition, and International Trade. Journal of International Economics. No. 9 (4), pp. 469-479

Krugman, P.R. (1980) Scale Economies, Product Differentiation, and the Pattern of Trade. American Economic Review, No. 70 (5), pp. 950-959

Allen, T., Giampietro, M. (2014) Holons, creaons, genons, environs, in hierarchy theory: Where we have gone. Ecological Modeling. vol. 293, pp. 31-41.

Alcamo, J. et al. (2003) Ecosystems and human well-being: a framework for assessment. Mil-lennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press, 266 p.

Endres, A., Kverner, I. (2004) Economics of natural recourses. Saint-Petersburg.: Piter, 256 p.

Holling, C.S. (1973) Resilience and Stability of Ecological Systems. Annual Review of Ecologi-cal Systems, No. 4, pp.1-24

Acemoglu, D., Robinson, J. A. (2012) Why nations fail: the origins of power, prosperity, and poverty. New York: Crown Publishing Group Retrieved from https://norayr.am/collections/books/Why-Nations-Fail-Daron-Acemoglu.pdf (accessed: 12.05.2021).

Haines-Young, R., Potschin, M. (2013) Common international classification of ecosystem ser-vices (CICES): Consultation on Version 4, August–December 2012