P.H. Shyshchenko, O.P. Havrylenko, Ye.Yu. Tsyhanok. PROTECTED AREAS UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF MEGAPOLIS: DIGRESSION AND RECOVERY WAYS (ON THE EXAMPLE OF KYIV)

https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2020.04.049
Ukr. geogr. z. 2020, N4:49-56
Language of publication: 
Ukrainian
Authors: 

P.H. Shyshchenko - Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv;
O.P. Havrylenko - Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv;
Ye.Yu. Tsyhanok - Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv.

Abstract: 

The purpose of the study is to identify the main causes of the protected ecosystems digression within the nature reserve fund (NRF) territories of Kyiv city and to substantiate measures to restore their conservation status. Through the analysis of mapping materials and regulations, using the QGIS software the map of the NRF objects distribution in Kyiv has been constructed. The area of these sites is also calculated and the degree of preservation in each administrative district of the city is determined. Each year, the Kyiv City Council declaratively extends the NRF area, but most of urban protected areas (UPA) do not accomplish their tasks and gradually lose the natural value previously created to preserve them. Due to the lack of funding and mismanagement, new ecological conflicts are emerging within these institutions and, as a result, degrading natural ecosystems. For example, the only urban National Natural Park (NNP) in Ukraine “Holosiyivskyi” since its inception in 1994 still has no official boundaries. Holosiyivskyi forest, the central part of the NNP, surrounded by residential buildings and highways from all sides, has the smallest area of reserved zone among the other Park massifs. Another illustrative example is the Lysa Hora Regional Landscape Park (RLP), where residential development comes close to its area. The RLP protected regime is disrupted along its existence and is only a declaration. Therefore, erosion processes are activated, red-book species die, nature use conflicts are widespread, ecosystem values are degraded. The study justifies the inefficiency of the NRF area further formal expansion in the Kyiv city. UPA activities largely do not meet the functions and criteria set by law. To improve the management of NRF institutions, it is proposed to change their functional zoning procedure and to transfer zoning on a landscape basis. In order to reduce the risk of illegal development near the UPA boundaries, it is necessary to develop land management projects for NRF institutions, to define their boundaries and to strengthen control over the implementation of Ukrainian environmental legislation. Creating buffer zones around the UPA protecting them from the adverse effects of urban infrastructure can prevent the chaotic development and further degradation of the ecosystems. The scientific novelty of the study is in identifying the causes of the digression of Kyiv’s protected areas and substantiating measures to overcome them. The spatial distribution of NRF institutions was determined and their structural and functional organization analyzed in order to achieve the purpose of the study.

Key words: 
Nature Reserve Fund, preservation degree, vulnerability to the impact, functional zoning, urban environment, digression of ecosystems, Kyiv city
Pages: 
49-56
References: 

1. IUCN World Conservation Congress. 081. Strengthening the IUCN Urban Alliance (2019). URL: https://www.iucncongress2020.org/motion/081
 
2. IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas. Urban Conservation Strategies. URL: https://www.iucn.org/commissions/world-commission-protected-areas/our-work/urban-conservation-strate...
 
3. IUCN launches global alliance for greener cities (2018). URL: https://www.iucn.org/news/secretariat/201809/iucn-launches-global-alliance-greener-cities
 
4. CitiesWithNature: Official website. URL: https://cwn.iclei.org/
 
5. Artmann M., Bastian O., Grunewald K. (2017). Using the Concepts of Green Infrastructure and Ecosystem Services to Specify Leitbilder for Compact and Green Cities - The Example of the Landscape Plan of Dresden (Germany). Sustainability, 9(2). https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020198. URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/2/198/htm
https://doi.org/10.3390/su9020198
 
6. Davies C. (2017). Urban green infrastructure in Europe: Is greenspace planning and policy compliant? Land Use Policy, 69, 93-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.08.018
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.08.018
 
7. Trzyna T., Edmiston J. T., Hyman G., Jeffrey A. Mc., Menezes P. C., Myrdal B., Phillips A., et al. (2014). Urban Protected Areas: Profiles and best practice guidelines. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series, 22, Gland, Switzerland: IUCN, 110 p. URL: https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-022.pdf
 
8. Fourault-Cauët V. (2017). Urban Natures. Introduction. Journal of Urban Research, 16. https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3302. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/articulo/3302
https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3302
 
9. Girault C. (2017). Between naturalness and urbanity, how are protected areas integrated into cities? The case of Helsinki (Finland). Journal of Urban Research, 19. https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3270. URL: https://journals.openedition.org/articulo/3270
https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3270
 
10. Manolaki P., Vogiatzakis I. N. (2017). Ecosystem services in a peri-urban protected area in Cyprus: a rapid appraisal. Nature Conservation, 22, 129-146. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.22.13840. URL: https://natureconservation.pensoft.net/article/13840/
https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.22.13840
 
11. Havrylenko O. P., Tsyhanok Ye. Yu. (2016). Conflicts of large cities protected areas: causes and consequences. Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Series: Geography. Iss. 2(65), 20-24. http://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2721.2016.65.4 [In Ukrainian]. [Гавриленко О.П., Циганок Є.Ю. Конфлікти природоохоронних територій великих міст: причини і наслідки // Вісник Київського національного університету імені Тараса Шевченка. Серія: Географія. 2016. Вип. 2(65). С. 20-24. http://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2721.2016.65.4]
https://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2721.2016.65.4
 
12. Shyshchenko P. H., Havrylenko O. P., Tsyhanok Ye. Yu. (2019). Ecosystem value of Holosiyivskyi forest as an urban protected area: causes and consequences of degradation. Ukrainian geographical journal, 4(108), 40-49. https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2019.04.040 [In Ukrainian]. [Шищенко П.Г., Гавриленко О.П., Циганок Є.Ю. Екосистемна цінність Голосіївського лісу як міської природоохоронної території: причини і наслідки деградації // Укр. геогр. журн. 2019. № 4(108). С. 40-49. https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2019.04.040]
https://doi.org/10.15407/ugz2019.04.040
 
13. Claeys C., Herat A., Barthelemy C., Deldreve V. (2017). The Calanques National Park, between environmental effort and urban effort. Journal of Urban Research, 16. https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3252. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/articulo/3252.
https://doi.org/10.4000/articulo.3252
 
14. Parnikoza I. Ju. (2017). Lysa Hora - tract over time. The vegetation and flora of the Lysa Hora in Kiev. URL: https://www.myslenedrevo.com.ua/uk/Sci/Kyiv/LysaGora/Nature/Flora.html [In Ukrainian]. [Парнікоза І. Ю. Лиса гора - урочище в плині часу. Рослинність та флора Лисої гори в Києві. 2017. URL: https://www.myslenedrevo.com.ua/uk/Sci/Kyiv/LysaGora/Nature/Flora.html]