Land use changes and their geoecological consequences in the Tunkinsky national park for 2000–2020 (based on geospatial data)

DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-2-31-383-398

View or download the article (Rus)

About the Authors

Nina N. Alekseeva

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Faculty of Geography,
1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russia,
E-mail: nalex01@mail.ru

Tatyana B. Shutukova

MSU-PPI University in Shenzhen,
1, Guojidaxueyuan str., Dayunxincheng, Shenzhen, 518172, China,
E-mail: putunkeeva98@mail.ru

Abstract

Based on multi-temporal geospatial data, the transformation of the land cover within the Tunkinsky National Park (Republic of Buryatia) is considered. It is one of the largest national parks in Russia and the only one whose boundaries coincide with the boundaries of the municipal district of the same name. About 250 thous. tourists visit the park annually, the number of tourists is ten times more than its permanent population. Over more than 30 years of the national park operation with active development of ecological and health tourism significant changes have occurred in the land use and land cover pattern. The reasons for these changes were natural and climatic, administrative and managerial, and socio-economic factors that influenced the territorial features of environmental and economic activities within the park. Based on the conjugate analysis of multi-temporal geospatial data on land cover of the GLAD project (Global Land Analysis and Discovery), with the involvement of ecological and geographical materials, 11 types of land cover transitions were identified, which were grouped into 8 directions of land use change for the periods of 2000–2010 and 2010–2020 and the period up to 2020 as a whole. Among them are reforestation, expansion of meadows and hayfields, abandonment of arable land, expansion of development, etc. The factors that determined these directions and their geoecological consequences for natural and natural-anthropogenic geosystems of the Tunkinsky National Park are considered. Geoecological consequences include the processes of forest restoration and eco-rehabilitation of landscapes (62 % of all changes), a decrease or loss of productivity of natural and anthropogenic landscapes (22 %) and the expansion of anthropogenically modified and technogenic landscapes (14 %). Thus, the nature of environmental and economic activities in the park for 2000–2020 contributed to the manifestation of environmentally positive trends, with an aggravation of the geoecological situation in areas of greatest recreational activity.

Keywords

land cover change, land use transformation, geospatial data, geoecological impact, ecotourism, functional zoning

References

  1. Alekseeva N.N., Klimanova O.A., Khazieva E.S. Global Land Cover Databases and Prospects for Their Use for Mapping Modern Landscapes. Izvestia RAN. Seriya Geograficheskaya (News of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Geographical Series), 2017. No. 1. P. 110–123 (in Russian). DOI: 10.1536/0373-2444-2017-1-110-123.
  2. Atutova Zh.V. Modern Landscapes of the Tunka Basin. Geography and Natural Resources, 2018. No. 1. P. 103–114 (in Russian). DOI: 10.21782/GIPR0206-1619-2018-1(103-114).
  3. Atutova Zh.V., Ekimovskaya O.A. Main Trends of the Restoration Dynamics of Agrarian Transformed Geosystems of the Tunka Basin. Izvestiya Irkutskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya “Nauki o Zemle” (The Bulletin of Irkutsk State University. Series “Earth Sciences”), 2019. V. 27. P. 16–31 (in Russian).
  4. Batraeva A.A. Main Types of Forage Lands of the Tunka Valley. Ecological, Biological and Economic Characteristics of Steppe and Meadow Plant Communities of Transbaikalia. Ulan-Ude, 1973. P. 214–220 (in Russian).
  5. Bilichenko I.N. Tunkinsky National Park: Natural Conditions and Problems of Nature Management. Proceedings of Irkutsk State Technical University, 2012. No. 7. P. 55–59 (in Russian).
  6. Budaeva D.G., Maksanova L.B.-Zh., Sharaldaeva V.D. Evolution of Functional Zoning of Tunkinsky National Park. Izvestiya Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshestva (Proceedings of the Russian Geographical Society), 2022. V. 154. No. 3. P. 66–76 (in Russian). DOI: 10.31857/S0869607122030028.
  7. Kalikhman T.P., Kalikhman A.D. Lake Baikal in the Nature Conservation Paradigm. Izvestiya Altaiskogo Otdeleniya Russkogo Geograficheskogo Obshestva (Proceedings of the Altay Branch of Russian Geographical Society), 2017. No. 2 (45). P. 24–46 (in Russian).
  8. Karnaukhov N.I. Koymarskie Swamps of the Tunka Depression and the Main Direction of Their Melioration. Proceedings of the Buryat Comprehensive Scientific Research Institute of Siberian Branch of Academy of Sciences of USSR. Series: Biological and Soil Sciences, 1960. Iss. 4. P. 38–45 (in Russian).
  9. Maksanova L., Bardakhanova T., Budaeva D., Mikheeva A., Lubsanova N., Sharaldaeva V., Eremko Z., Andreeva A., Ayusheeva S., Khrebtova T. Ecotourism Development in the Russian Areas under Nature Protection. Sustainability, 2023. V. 15. Art. 13661. DOI: 10.3390/su151813661.
  10. Plishkina O.V., Akharzhanova T.V. Geoecological Features of Landscapes of Intermountain Basins (Tugnuyskaya and Tunkinskaya Basins). Ulan-Ude: Publishing House of the East Siberian University of Technology, 2011. 160 p. (in Russian).
  11. Potapov P., Hansen M.C., Pickens A., Hernandez-Serna A., Tyukavina A., Turubanova S., Zalles V., Li X., Khan A., Stolle F., Harris N., Song X.-P., Baggett A., Kommareddy I., Kommareddy A. The Global 2000–2020 Land Cover and Land Use Change Dataset Derived from the Landsat Archive: First Results. Frontiers in Remote Sensing, 2022. V. 3. Art. 856903. DOI: 10.3389/frsen.2022.856903.
  12. Sanjeev E.D. Economic Assessment of Recreational Ecosystem Services (On the Example of the Republic of Buryatia). Geography and Natural Resources, 2019. No. 2. P. 141–146 (in Russian). DOI: 10.21782/GIPR0206-1619-2019-2(141-146).
  13. Semenov Yu.M., Silaev A.V. Geosystems of the Tunka Basin. Irkutsk State Technical University, 2017. V. 21. P. 114–122 (in Russian).
  14. Tretyachenko D.A., Klimanova O.A., Alekseeva N.N. Geoecological Implications of Land Cover Changes 1992–2020. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 5. Geography, 2025. V. 80. No. 2. P. 3–18 (in Russian). DOI: 10.55959/MSU0579-9414.5.80.2.1.
  15. Wang Y., Sun Y., Cao X., Wang Y., Zhang W., Cheng X. A Review of Regional and Global Scale Land Use/Land Cover (LULC) Mapping Products Generated from Satellite Remote Sensing. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 2023. V. 206. P. 311–334. DOI: 10.1016/j.isprsjprs.2023.11.014.
  16. Zhuravlev V.A., Vorobyovskaya E.L., Kirillov S.N. Modern Nature Management in the Tunkinsky National Park. InterCarto. InterGIS. Proceedings of the International Conference, 2022. V. 28. Part 2. P. 362–375 (in Russian). DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2022-2-28-362-375.

For citation: Alekseeva N.N., Shutukova T.B. Land use changes and their geoecological consequences in the Tunkinsky national park for 2000–2020 (based on geospatial data). InterCarto. InterGIS. Moscow: MSU, Faculty of Geography, 2025. V. 31. Part 2. P. 383–398. DOI: 10.35595/2414-9179-2025-2-31-383-398 (in Russian)