MAKROIQTISODIY STATISTIKADA EKOLOGIK OMILLARNI HISOBGA OLISHNING XALQARO TAJRIBASI VA O‘ZBEKISTONDA YASHIL YAIM KONSEPSIYASINI QO‘LLASH ISTIQBOLLARI
Keywords:
yashil YaIM, barqaror rivojlanish, makroiqtisodiy statistika, tabiiy kapital, ekotizim xizmatlari, ekologik hisoblar, O‘zbekiston.Abstract
Maqolada milliy hisoblar tizimida ekologik omillarni hisobga olishning uslubiy asoslari hamda «yashil YaIM» konsepsiyasini qo‘llash bo‘yicha xalqaro tajriba tahlil qilingan. Makroiqtisodiy statistikaga tabiiy kapital va ekotizim xizmatlarini integratsiyalash, shu jumladan ekologik hisoblardan foydalanish hamda iqtisodiy o‘sishning an’anaviy ko‘rsatkichlarini to‘g‘rilash bo‘yicha yondashuvlar ko‘rib chiqilgan. Barqaror rivojlanish va «yashil» iqtisodiyotga qaratilgan strategik yo‘lni amalga oshirish nuqtai nazaridan O‘zbekistonda yashil yalpi ichki mahsulotni joriy etish istiqbollariga alohida e’tibor qaratilgan. Ekologik omillarni hisobga olishning xalqaro usullarini milliy statistikaga moslashtirish tabiiy resurslarni samarali boshqarish hamda barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy o‘sishni ta’minlash uchun zarur tahliliy ma’lumotlar bazasining sifatini oshirish imkonini beradi.
Downloads
References
1. Oʻzbekiston Respublikasi Prezidenti. 2022 — 2026-yillarga moʻljallangan Yangi Oʻzbekistonning taraqqiyot strategiyasi toʻgʻrisida Farmon. 28.01.2022, PF-60-son.
2. Deklaratsiya Rio-de-Janeyro po okruzhayushchey srede i razvitiyu, 14.06.1992 [Elektron resurs]. – Rezhim dostupa: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/8308082 (data obrascheniya: 10.07.2019).
3. Antal M., van den Bergh J. Evaluating Alternatives to GDP as Measures of Social Welfare/Progress // Working Paper. – 2014. – I. 56, March. – 12 p.
4. Bazard J., Banzhaf S. What are ecosystem services? The needs for standardized environmental accounting units // Ecological Economics. – 2007. – V. 63, I. 2–3, August. – P. 616–626.
5. Chelli F. M., Ciommi M., Gigliarno C. The index of sustainable economic welfare: A comparison of two Italian regions // Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences. – 2013. – V. 81. – P. 443–448.
6. Costanza R., Daly H.E. Natural Capital and Sustainable Development // Conservation Biology. – 1992. – V. 6, I. 1. – P. 37–46.
7. Ecosystem and Human Well-being. A report of the millennium ecosystem assessment. – 2005. – P. 49, 71.
8 Fisher B., Costanza R., Turner R.K., Morling P. Defining and classifying ecosystem services for decision making / CSERGE. – P. 10–13.
9 SEEA Experimental Ecosystem Accounting: Technical Recommendation. UNEP/UNSD/CBD. – 2017. – V. 4.1, I. 6, March. – P. 36.
10. Stjepanovic S., Tomic D., Skare V. A new approach to measuring green GDP: a cross-country analysis // Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues. – 2017. – V. 4, I. 4. – P. 574–590.
11. Sutton P.C., Costanza R. Global estimates of market and non-market values derived from nighttime satellite imagery, land cover, and ecosystem service valuation // Ecological Economics. – 2002. – V. 41, I. 3. – P. 512.
12. United Nations Conference on Environment & Development. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3–14 June 1992. – par. 8.41
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
License Terms of our Journal
