Methodological aspects of calculating the ecological footprint in the Republic of Kazakhstan at the regional level

DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-1-31-158-171

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Author

Natalia A. Koldobskaia

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Faculty of Geography, Department of Economic and Social Geography of Russia,
1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, Russia, 119991,

Shenzhen MSU-BIT University, Faculty of Geography,
299, Zhui str., Shenzhen, Guandun, 518172, China,

E-mail: koldobskaya@gmail.com

Abstract

The article considers the ecological footprint as an indicator of sustainable development and environmental impact on the territory. The author describes the methodological aspects of calculating the ecological footprint at the regional level in the Republic of Kazakhstan. A description and detailed analysis of 7 sub-index categories that make up the ecological footprint are given: crop production, pasture, forestry, fisheries, energy, infrastructural and industrial. The main factors contributing to the formation of the ecological footprint are the following: different population densities in each region, the presence of industrial enterprises, processing and processing plants on the territory. This factor directly affects energy consumption in the region as a whole. Features of natural areas: it depends on what area of specified acreage, pasture lands in a particular region. As a result of the calculations, a typology of the regions of the Republic of Kazakhstan was compiled according to the value of the ecological footprint. The following types were identified: regions with low ecological footprint, medium, high, and extremely high. The regions with extremely high ecological footprint are North Kazakhstan, Akmola, Almaty, Zhetysu. In these regions, such high values are due to large areas of agricultural land: arable land and pastures. The Almaty Region and the Zhetysu Region have a large area of corn under cultivation — more than 70 thous. ha. Wheat crops are grown in Akmola Region and North Kazakhstan Region. The maximum values of the crop and pasture footprint are reflected in the overall ecological footprint. Regions with a high ecological footprint: East Kazakhstan, Abai, Kostanay and Pavlodar regions—these are actively mining coal and iron ores; Atyrau and West Kazakhstan regions are distinguished by large deposits and production of oil and natural gas; Zhambyl Region has a fairly large number of pastures. Regions with an average ecological footprint: Karaganda, Ulytau and Turkestan regions due to the fact that there is relatively little mining and less land is used for cultivation of crops. There is a low level of ecological footprint in the Kyzylorda, Mangystau and Aktobe regions due to the minimal use of land for arable and pasture areas.

Keywords

ecological footprint, complex index, Republic of Kazakhstan, environmental impact, sustainable development

References

  1. Bazan G. Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Electronic Green Journal, 1997. V. 1. Iss. 7. DOI: 10.5070/g31710273.
  2. Bobylev S.N. Report on Human Development in the Russian Federation. Sustainable Development Goals. UN and Russia. Short version, 2016. P. 3–36 (in Russian).
  3. Boev P.A. Ecological Footprint of the Regions of the Russian Federation. Moscow: WWF Russia, 2017. P. 11–70 (in Russian).
  4. Čuček L., Klemeš J.J., Kravanja Z. Assessing and Measuring Environmental Impact and Sustainability. Chapter 5—Overview of Environmental Footprints. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2015. P. 131–193. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-12-799968-5.00005-1.
  5. Fang K., Heijungs R. Theoretical Exploration for the Combination of the Ecological, Energy, Carbon, and Water Footprints: Overview of a Footprint Family. Ecological Indicators, 2014. V. 36. P. 508–518. DOI: 10.1016/J.ECOLIND.2013.08.017.
  6. Hoekstra A., Mekonnen M. The Water Footprint of Humanity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2011. V. 109. No. 9. P. 3232–3237. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1109936109.
  7. Kovalev Yu.Yu. The Concept of Sustainable Development and its Implementation in the European Union. Proceedings of the Ural Federal University. Series 3. Social Sciences, 2014. V. 9. No. 4. P. 54–65 (in Russian).
  8. Kuznetsova Yu.A. Stages of Formation and Development of the Concept of Sustainable Development. Young Scientist, 2013. No. 5 (52). P. 337–339 (in Russian).
  9. Lukyanchikov N.N., Potravny I.M. Economics and Organization of Environmental Management. Moscow: Unity, 2002. P. 142–158 (in Russian).
  10. Markov Yu.G. Social Factors of Ecologically Sustainable Development. Patterns of Social Development: Guidelines and Criteria for Future Models. Novosibirsk: Siberian Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, 2004. P. 29–33 (in Russian).
  11. Mustafaev K.J. The Ecological Footprint of Kazakhstan’s Man-Made System is an Indicator of Sustainable Development. International Research Journal, 2015. P. 18–28 (in Russian). DOI: 10.18454/IRJ.2015.42.023.
  12. Palmer A. Evaluating Ecological Footprints. Electronic Green Journal, 1998. V. 1. Iss. 9. DOI: 10.5070/G31910324.
  13. Sausheva O.S. Ecological Footprint as an Indicator of Economic Growth at the Present Stage of Development. Russian Journal of Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2017. V. 4. No. 4. P. 2–8 (in Russian). DOI: 10.15862/13RRO417.
  14. Vlasov Yu.S. Ecological Footprint of the Crop Industry of the Chuvash Republic: Possibilities of Using the Indicator at the Regional Level. Moscow, 2008. P. 1–5 (in Russian).

For citation: Koldobskaia N.A. Methodological aspects of calculating the ecological footprint in the Republic of Kazakhstan at the regional level. InterCarto. InterGIS. Moscow: MSU, Faculty of Geography, 2025. V. 31. Part 1. P. 158–171. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-1-31-158-171 (in Russian)