ORIGINAL RESEARCH
Assessment of Strength of Interaction
between Nature-Resource Potentials
in Provincial Ecosystems of Ukraine
More details
Hide details
1
Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro 49000, Ukraine
2
Yuriy Fedkovych Chernivtsi National University, Chernivtsi 58000, Ukraine
3
Vasyl’ Stus Donetsk National University, Vinnytsia 21012, Ukraine
Submission date: 2024-04-09
Final revision date: 2024-05-28
Acceptance date: 2024-07-24
Online publication date: 2025-01-08
Publication date: 2025-07-22
Corresponding author
Stepan Rudenko
Oles Honchar Dnipro National University, Dnipro 49000, Ukraine
Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2025;34(5):5813-5821
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
The strength of the interaction is quantitatively established between nature-resource potentials
in 14 provincial ecosystems of Ukraine, the latter being the equivalents of physic-geographical
provinces (krais) of Ukraine. Nature-resource potential that covers mineral, water, land, forest, fauna,
and natural recreation resources is regarded as one of the most essential characteristics of the field of
ecosystems’ influence (effect). It is asserted that the strength of the effect of nature-resource potential
of the ecosystem, or the bio-center, or the eco-region is the result of interaction between its central
place and the surrounding area (periphery). The bigger the core (central place) and the less the distance
to the neighboring core (other place of the ecosystem) with its own mass, the stronger it will affect
the surround. The above strength is calculated according to the developed gravity methods. The value
of the potential of nature resources in ecosystems in 2015-2021 prices represents the “body mass”,
and the distances between the provinces are established to be those between their geometrical centers.
The closest interaction is found to exist between nature-resource potentials of the Dniester-Dnieper
and the Prychornomorskyy, as well as between the Donetsk and the Zadonetsko-Donskyy, the Left-
Bank-Dnieper-Pryazovskyy and the Donetsk, the Left-Bank-Dnieper and the East-Ukrainian, and
the Podilsko-Prydniprovskyy and the Dniester-Dnieper provincial ecosystems. The least strength of
interaction between nature-resource potentials is observed between the Ukrainian Carpathians and the
Crimean Mountains, the West-Ukrainian and the Crimean Mountains, the Polissia and the Crimean
Mountains, the Zadonetsko-Donskyy and the Crimean Mountains, the Ukrainian Carpathians and the
Prychornomorsko-Pryazovskyy provincial ecosystems.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
REFERENCES (29)
1.
KRAVCHENKO S.М., KOSTYTSKYY М.V. Environmental Ethics and Human Psychology. Lviv: Svit, 104, 1992 [In Ukrainian].
2.
KUCHERIAVYY V.P. Ecology. Lviv: Svit. pp. 500, 2000 [In Ukrainian].
3.
HOLUBETS М.А. Ecosystemology. Lviv: Polli. pp. 256, 2000 [In Ukrainian].
4.
SHYSHCHENKO P.G. Physico-Geographical Province. Geographical Encyclopedia of Ukraine: In 3 Volumes. Kyiv: Ukrainian Encyclopedia named after M.P. Bazhan, 3, pp. 340, 1993 [In Ukrainian].
5.
OLEKSANDR MARYNYCH - prominent Ukrainian geographer. In honour of the centennial of the birth. Physical Geography and Geomorphology, 43 (3), 7, 2020 [In Ukrainian].
6.
RUDENKO L.H., GOLUBTSOV O.G., CHEKHNIY V.M., DIDUKH YA.P., MARUNYAK YE.O., LISOVSKY S.A., IVANENKO YE.I., AKIMOV I.A., VAKARENKO L.P., VASILYUK O.V., VINOKOUROV D.S., KOSTYUSHIN V.A., TYTAR V.M., MATVIISHYNA ZH.M., OLIYNYK YA.B. Methodology and practice of assessing the territory of Ukraine for conservation. Kyiv, 248, 2020 [In Ukrainian].
7.
RUDENKO L.H., GOLUBTSOV O.G., CHEKHNIY V.M., TYMULIAK L.M., FARION YU.M. Landuse changes in the Forest-Steppe zone of Ukraine during 1991–2018: methodology of research and main trends. Ukrainian geographical journal, 1, 24, 2019 [In Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz20....
8.
GOLUBTSOV O.G., CHEKHNIY V.M., FARION YU.M. Geoinformation mapping and analysis of modern landscapes for the purpose of the nature conservation (by the example of the Steppe zone of Ukraine). Ukrainian geographical journal, 2, 61, 2018 [In Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz20....
9.
MYRON I.V., SHOVKUN T.M. Ecological balance of landscapes in the Chernihiv region. Physical Geography and Geomorphology, 45 (4–6), 66, 2022 [In Ukrainian].
https://doi.org/10.17721/phgg.....
10.
BILOYS L., SAMOILENKO V., SHYSHCHENKO P., HAVRYLENKO O. Ecoregional biodiversity monitoring. XVI International Scientific Conference “Monitoring of Geological Processes and Ecological Condition of the Environment”, 2022, 1, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4....
11.
SAMOILENKO V., BILOUS L., HAVRYLENKO O., DIBROVA I. Geoinformation model cause-effect analysis of anthropogenic impact in the Podilsko-Prydniprovskyi region. Geoinformatics. Publisher: European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 2021, 1, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4....
12.
GOLUBTSOV O.G., SOROKINA L.YU., TYMULIAK L.M., CHEKHNIY V.M., FARION YU.M., ROGA I.V., BATOVA N.I., PETROV M.F., NAZARCHUK N.I. Geoinformation Analysis of Anthropogenic Changes in the Landscapes of the Forest-Steppe Zone of Ukraine. Ukrainian geographical journal, 3, 41, 2021 [In Ukrainian].
13.
BARANOVSKA O., BARANOVSKYI M. Geoecological analysis and assessment of the Chernihiv region territory. Physical Geography and Geomorphology, 1–3, 18, 2021 [In Ukrainian].
14.
MALSKA M., PANKIV N. Tourist-resource potential of the territory: textbook. Kyiv: Publisher: FOP Picha Y.V., 534, 2022 [In Ukrainian].
15.
CHASOVSCHI C.E. Development of a cross-border cultural route. A quality assessment proposal. The USV annals of economics and public administration, 22 (2), 32, 2022.
https://doi.org/10.4316/aepa.2....
17.
YAROMENKO S.G. Tourist resources of Ukraine. Kyiv: Publisher: Oldi. 472, 2021 [In Ukrainian].
18.
RAMIREZ-MARQUEZ C., POSADAS-PAREDES T., RAYA-TAPIA A.Y., PONCE-ORTEGA J.M. Natural Resource Optimization and Sustainability in Society 5.0: A Comprehensive Review. Resources, 13 (2), 19, 2024.
https://doi.org/10.3390/resour....
19.
MARTINA A.E., COLLINS S.J., CROWE S., GIRARD J., NAUJOKAITIS-LEWIS I., SMITH A.C., LINDS K., SCOTT M., FAHRIG L. Effects of formland heterogeneity on biodiversity are similar to – or even larger than – the effects of farming practices. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Enviroment, 288, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee....
22.
LUDĚK K., TOMČÍKOVÁ I., RAKYTOVÁ I. Development versus conservation: evaluation of landscape structure changes in Demänovská Valley, Slovakia. Journal of Mountain Science, 15, 1153, 2018.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11629....
23.
GREKOUSIS G. Spatial Analysis Methods and Practice: Describe – Explore – Explain through GIS. Cambridge: University Press, 518, 2020.
https://doi.org/10.1017/978110....
24.
ISARD W. Methods of Regional Analysis: on Introduction to Regional Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M.I.T. Press, pp. 835, 1960.
25.
HAGGETT P. Geography: A Global Synthesis. Person College Div; 4th edition, pp. 833, 2001.
26.
PETLIN V.М. Patterns of organization of landscape facies. Odesa: Mayak. pp. 240, 1998 [In Ukrainian].
27.
PETLIN V.М. Harmony of Organization of Natural Territorial Systems: Monograph. Lutsk: Publishing Center of Lesya Ukrainka Eastern European National University, Prostir-M, pp. 516, 2019 [In Ukrainian].
28.
GRODZINSKI М.D. Understanding the Landscape: Place and Space: Monograph. In 2 Volumes. Kyiv: Publishing and Printing Center “Kyiv University.”, 2, 503, 2005 [In Ukrainian].
29.
RUDENKO S., RUDENKO V. Nature-Resources Potential of Natural Regions of Ukraine in Present-day Figures. Ecological Sciences, 6 (51), 84, 2023.
https://doi.org/10.32846/2306-....