METHODS TO VALUE NATURAL RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES: EVOLUTIONARY CHANGES

The mess in evaluation approaches to nature and the disparity of evaluation results are the reasons for improving the evaluation process and streamlining the economic valuation methods. The aim of the research is to analyze the existing economic valuation methods of natural resources and ecosystem services and to improve the evaluation process to increase the level of objectivity and comparability of the evaluation results. The research methods are the comparative analysis, comparison, grouping, averaging, analogy method. The studies reveal the stage-wise evolution of the evaluation process in ecological economics and environmental economics, the sequence of the emergence of new methods and the external factors that cause these changes. The latter include: the actualization of economic valuation of ecosystem services due to the appearance of ecosystem approach; the emergence of a new object of evaluation as the natural capital, combining natural resources and ecosystem services; creation of a new valuation model defined by the concept of total economic value, and the transition to market. The evaluation process becomes more complex because of a socio-economic approach to economic valuation, which requires taking into account possible social and environmental consequences that reduce the value of the object of valuation. The paper contains the analysis of the available classifications of economic valuation methods and offers the author's classification, which assumes the usage of four classification criteria, including: the nature of evaluation, the basis of evaluation, the evaluation techniques and the attitude to the market. The qualitative valuation using a point system is considered as an auxiliary stage to the monetary assessment. The identified trends in the change in the methods of economic evaluation and the author's classification of economic valuation methods can help improve the evaluation process and increase the reliability and comparability of evaluation results.