Abstract: Introduction. The present article forecasts the organizational, economic, and strategic aspects of the multifunctional forestry capitalization in the Kemerovo region aka Kuzbass. The authors analyzed the current Russian laws in order to answer the following question: is multi-purpose forest utilization able to ensure the rights and interests of all its participants, while providing legal means to resolve various related issues? Study objects and methods. The research featured the legal norms in the field of forest, wildlife, and subsoil utilization. The authors assessed their ability to guarantee sustainable use of natural resources while protecting the rights and legitimate interests of forest users. The study was based on general standard methods of cognition and special legal methods. Results and discussion. Hunting is regulated by hunting sector agreements. The Forest Code and the Hunting Law of the Russian Federation do not prohibit or restrict other types of forest utilization of hunting grounds. Most Western European countries link land ownership to hunting rights, which makes landowners liable for damage caused by hunting and obliged to protect the local fauna. Conclusion. Russian legislation does not provide for direct conciliation and compensation mechanisms in cases a part of hunting ground is used for other purposes, e.g. mining. Russian legislation needs legal termination procedures for hunting sector agreements and compensation rules in case a land plot was seized from hunting providers for subsoil use.
Keywords: hunting sector agreement, multipurpose forest utilization, regulatory framework
Citation: Prosekov AYu, Lisina NL. Organizational, Economic, and Strategic Aspects of Capitalization of Multipurpose Forest Industries. Strategizing: Theory and Practice. 2021;1(2):206–215. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21603/2782-2435-2021-1-2-206-215
Received 16 September 2021. Reviewed 07 October 2021. Accepted 11 October 2021
1. Bai Y, Liu M, Yang L. Calculation of ecological compensation standards for arable land based on the value flow of support services. Land. 2021;10(7):1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070719.
2. Bolʹshakov NM, Ivanitskaya II, Belozyorova NV. Novyy podkhod k lesopolʹzovaniyu [A new approach to forest management]. Regional Economics: Theory and Practice. 2009;(36):2–12. (In Russ.)
3. Deng C, Zhang S, Lu Y, Li Q. Determining the ecological compensation standard based on forest multifunction evaluation and financial net present value analysis: A case study in Southwestern Guangxi, China. Journal of Sustainable Forestry. 2020;3(7):730–749. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2020.1723644.
4. Gerts EF, Mekhrentsev AV, Pobedinsky VV, Terinov NN, Urazova AF. Improving the efficiency of multifunctional machines for intensive forestry. Russian Forestry Journal. 2021;379(1):138–149. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.37482/0536-1036-2021-1-138-149.
5. Ivanytskaya II, Levina IV. New approaches to economic assessment of forest potential. Regional problems of transforming the economy. 2020;114(4):27–33. (In Russ.)
6. Kashtelyan TV. Rental relations in forestry: institutional positions. Proceeedings of BSTU. Issue 5. Economics and Management. 2018;214(2):46–51. (In Russ.)
7. Lei M, Yuan X-Y, Yao X-Y. Synthesize dual goals: A study on China’s ecological poverty alleviation system. Journal of Integrative Agriculture. 2021;20(4):1042–1059. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2095-3119(21)63635-3.
8. Likhatsky YuP, Chernykh AS, Kharin SV. Theoretical concepts of multi-purpose, rational continuous use of forests in Russia and abroad. Forest Engineering Journal. 2017;7(4):100–108. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.12737/article_5a3ced06071999.40465463.
9. Liu M, Bai Y, Yang L, Wang B. Calculation of ecological compensation standards for the kuancheng traditional chestnut cultivation system. Journal of Resources and Ecology. 2021;12(4):471–479. https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2021.04.005.
10. Lukina NV, Geraskina AP, Gornov AV, Shevchenko NE, Kuprin AV, Chernov TI, et al. Biodiversity and climate regulating functions of forests: Current issues and prospects for research. Forest Science Issues. 2020;3(4):1–90. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.31509/2658-607x-2020-3-4-1-90.
11. Mekhrentsev AV, Preshkin GA, Rusin KI, Ivanova NV, Mezenova VV. Forestry project management as an alternative to the common practice of forestry regulation. Agrarian Bulletin of the Urals. 2016;153(11):107–111. (In Russ.)
12. Petrov VN. Organizatsiya, planirovanie i upravlenie v lesnom khozyaystve [Organization, planning, and management in forestry]. St. Petersburg: Nauka; 2010. 414 p. (In Russ.)
13. Pisarenko AI, Strakhov VV. O lesnoy politike Rossii [The forest policy of Russia]. Moscow: Yurisprudentsiya; 2012. 599 p. (In Russ.)
14. Preshkin GA, Rusin KI. Model of system dynamics for forest product cost forming. Agrarian Bulletin of the Urals. 2016;144(2):41–46. (In Russ.)