Selecting an analytical model and quantitative indicators for geoinformation analysis of territorial entities sustainable development

Geoinformatics
UDC: 
528.94:004.9:332.14
DOI: 
10.22389/0016-7126-2024-1011-9-46-56
1 Zhurkin I.G.
2 Orlov P.Yu.
3 Gruzinov V.S.
4 Mineev A.N.
Year: 
2024
№: 
9
1011
Pages: 
46-56

Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography (MIIGAiK)

1, 
2, 
3, 

National Research Ogarev Mordovia State University

4, 
Abstract:
Currently, there are no generally accepted algorithms for assessing, analyzing and forecasting the sustainable development of administrative-territorial units. The authors introduce the definition of this term, which implies the successful functioning of a human community over time carrying out economic activities without threats to its environment. Also, an analytical model for representation of its regional integrated indicator in the form of a vector with differential components, which characterize economic growth, environmental and social metrics, in a three-dimensional affine space, is proposed. Furthermore, we present a multiplicative criterion for assessing partial criteria of sustainable development efficiency and the basic expression for its parameters computation based on the set of economic, environmental and social ones, including such as the availability and quality of natural resources, regional labour resources, eco-factors, etc. The proposed vector model is based on the geoinformation approach and can be deployed within the framework of GIS of sustainable development for geo-analysis, modeling and mapping of natural resource potential and ecological state of intensively advancing territories, considering the dynamics of this process. Important properties of the geoinformation approach to assessing territorial entities’ forward growth, spatial and semantic scalability, are noted. In addition, the functional requirements and preliminary architecture of the core, modules, clients and layers of the related thematic geographic information system for the management, planning and forecasting the said indicator within the framework of digital economy are described
The research was carried out within the state assignment FSFE-2023-0005 of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation
References: 
1.   Alferova T. V., Tret'yakova E. A. Kontseptual'noe modelirovanie opredeleniya kategorii «ustoichivoe razvitie». Zhurnal ekonomicheskoi teorii, 2012, no. 4, pp. 46–52.
2.   Arkhipova O. E. Veb-GIS dlya otsenki stsenariev ispol'zovaniya prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala yuzhnogo makroregiona. InterKarto. InterGIS, 2017, Vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 144–156. DOI: 10.24057/2414-9179-2017-2-23-144-156.
3.   Bagranyuk I. A., Bannikov V. P., Karimova A. A. Aspekty proektirovaniya avtomatizirovannoi informatsionnoi sistemy dlya prognoza rasprostraneniya i sposobov likvidatsii lesnykh pozharov na zemlyakh oborony i bezopasnosti RF. Uspekhi sovremennogo estestvoznaniya, 2022, no. 4, pp. 73–79. DOI: 10.17513/use.37812.
4.   Glazunov G. P., Afonchenko N. V., Sanzharov A. I. Struktura bazy dannykh prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala agrolandshaftov. Vestnik Kurskoi gosudarstvennoi sel'skokhozyaistvennoi akademii, 2017, no. 8, pp. 6–11.
5.   Gubanov M. N., Nokelainen T. S., Ryl'skii I. A. Kartografirovanie truboprovodnogo transporta uglevodorodov arkticheskogo regiona Rossii. InterKarto. InterGIS, 2020, Vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 105–115. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2020-1-26-105-115.
6.   Dmitriev V. V. Integral'naya otsenka ustoichivosti sotsio-ekologo-ekonomicheskoi sistemy. Trudy Ob"edinennogo nauchnogo soveta po gumanitarnym problemam i istoriko-kul'turnomu naslediyu, 2016, Vol. 2015, pp. 150–162.
7.   Zhurkin I. G. Kontseptsiya postroeniya ekologo-tekhnicheskoi informatsionnoi sistemy. Izvestia vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 1992, no. 2, pp. 105–118.
8.   Kiselev V. V., Kornilov A. G., Goleusov P. V., Vyrodova Ya. V. Geoinformatsionnaya model' dlya otsenki vozdeistviya zhivotnovodcheskoi otrasli na okruzhayushchuyu sredu Belgorodskoi oblasti. Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. Geografiya. Geoekologiya, 2023, no. 3, pp. 122–131.
9.   Knaub R. V., Ignat'eva A. V. Ispol'zovanie programmy Microsoft Excel dlya kartografirovaniya indikatorov ustoichivogo razvitiya territorii. Geoinformatika, 2021, no. 4, pp. 50–56. DOI: 10.47148/1609-364X-2021-4-50-56.
10.   Koptyug V. A., Matrosov V. M., Levashov V. K., Demyanko Yu. G. Ustoichivoe razvitie tsivilizatsii i mesto v nei Rossii: problemy formirovaniya natsional'noi strategii. Vladivostok: Dal'nauka, 1997, 82 p.
11.   Kostylev A. A. Podkhody k otsenke prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala i pokazateli effektivnosti ego ispol'zovaniya v regione. Sotsial'no-ekonomicheskie protsessy i yavleniya, 2010, no. 3 (19), pp. 110–118.
12.   Krupochkin E. P., Bryukhanova E. A., Rygalova M. V. Rekonstruktsiya gorodskogo prostranstva Tobol'ska rubezha XIX–XX vv. sredstvami GIS-tekhnologii. Zhurnal Sibirskogo federal'nogo universiteta. Ser. Gumanitarnye nauki, 2023, Vol. 16, no. 7, pp. 1062–1074.
13.   Lebedeva M. A. Teoretiko-metodologicheskie aspekty otsenki prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala. Zhurnal ekonomicheskikh issledovanii, 2019, Vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 25–35.
14.   Lyubushin N. P., Babicheva N. E., Konyshkov A. S. Ustoichivoe razvitie: otsenka, analiz, prognozirovanie. Ekonomicheskii analiz: teoriya i praktika, 2017, Vol. 16, no. 12, pp. 2392–2406. DOI: 10.24891/ea.16.12.2392.
15.   Moiseev N. N. Ekologiya i obrazovanie. Moskva: YuNISAM, 1996, 192 p.
16.   Nikolaeva O. N. Prirodno-resursnaya geoinformatsionnaya model' regiona kak sredstvo dlya povysheniya effektivnosti planirovaniya i vedeniya prirodopol'zovaniya. Vestnik SGUGiT, 2016, no. 1(33), pp. 107–113.
17.   Novoselova I. Yu. Teoretiko-metodicheskie osnovy otsenki prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala regiona. Kontury global'nykh transformatsii: politika, ekonomika, pravo, 2011, no. 4, pp. 144–148.
18.   Orlov P. Yu., Zhurkin I. G., Kamynina N. R., Litvinenko M. V., Vasyutinskii I. Yu., Nepoklonov V. B. Analiz opyta otsenki prirodno-resursnogo potentsiala i ustoichivogo razvitiya territorii. Izvestia vuzov. Geodesy and Aerophotosurveying, 2023, Vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 45–64.
19.   Rybak V. A., Shokr A. Avtomatizirovannaya sistema ucheta nalichiya i ispol'zovaniya prirodnykh resursov. Sistemnyi analiz i prikladnaya informatika, 2017, no. 3, pp. 50–57. DOI: 10.21122/2309-4923-2017-3-50-57.
20.   Sizov A. P., Portnov A. M., Paulyus K., Mansberger R. Kriterii otsenki ustoichivogo razvitiya prigorodnykh territorii gorodskikh aglomeratsii: problemy i puti reshenii. Estestvennye i tekhnicheskie nauki, 2019, no. 12 (138), pp. 201–209. DOI: 10.25633/ETN.2019.12.19.
21.   Tikunov V. S., Panin A. N., Gaidukov V. R. Atlasnaya informatsionnaya sistema dlya formirovaniya integral'nykh indeksov sotsial'no-ekonomicheskogo razvitiya territorii. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Ser. 5. Geografiya, 2023, Vol. 78, no. 4, pp. 66–74. DOI: 10.55959/MSU0579-9414.5.78.4.6.
22.   Tikunov V. S., Tsapuk D. A. Kartografirovanie ustoichivogo razvitiya regionov. InterKarto, 1997, Vol. 3, pp. 428–441.
23.   Akbulut B. (2021) Degrowth. Rethinking Marxism, Volume 33, no. 1, pp. 98–110. DOI: 10.1080/08935696.2020.1847014.
24.   Dmitriev V. V., Ogurtsov A. N., Hovanov N. V., Osipov G. K., Kulesh V. P., Sergeyev Yu. N., Fedorova I. V. (2020) Integral assessment of condition and sustainability of socio-ecological-economic systems. Landscape Modelling and Decision Support. Springer Nature Switzerland AG, Cham, pp. 49–78.
25.   Georgescu-Roegen N. Th (1971) The Entropy Law and the Economic Process. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 457 p. DOI: 10.4159/harvard.9780674281653.
26.   Hickel J. (2019) The contradiction of the sustainable development goals: Growth versus ecology on a finite planet. Sustainable Development, Volume 27, no. 5, pp. 873–884. DOI: 10.1002/sd.1947.
27.   Kerschner C. (2010) Economic de-growth vs. steady-state economy. Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 18, no. 6, pp. 544–551. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.10.019.
28.   Luukkanen J., Vehmas J., Kaivo-oja J., O’Mahony T. (2024) Towards a General Theory of Sustainable Development: Using a Sustainability Window Approach to Explore All Possible Scenario Paths of Economic Growth and Degrowth. Sustainability, no. 16 (13): 5326, DOI: 10.3390/su16135326.
29.   Martínez-Alier J., Pascual U., Vivien F.-D., Zaccai E. (2010) Sustainable de-growth: Mapping the context, criticisms and future prospects of an emergent paradigm. Ecological Economics, no. 69 (9), pp. 1741–1747. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.017.
30.   Zhurkin I. G., Portnov A. M., Druchinin S. S. (2020) Geoinformation space monitoring in the task of sustainable development of the regions located along the main ground routes. First Conference on Sustainable Development: Industrial Future of Territories (IFT 2020), no. 208: 01016, DOI: 10.1051/e3sconf/202020801016.
Citation:
Zhurkin I.G., 
Orlov P.Yu., 
Gruzinov V.S., 
Mineev A.N., 
(2024) Selecting an analytical model and quantitative indicators for geoinformation analysis of territorial entities sustainable development. Geodesy and cartography = Geodezia i Kartografia, 85(9), pp. 46-56. (In Russian). DOI: 10.22389/0016-7126-2024-1011-9-46-56
Publication History
Received: 28.06.2024
Accepted: 19.09.2024
Published: 20.10.2024

Content

2024 September DOI:
10.22389/0016-7126-2024-1011-9