e-ISSN 2518-1181
DOI 10.33146/2518-1181
Online Media ID R40-06293
← Back Published: 30.10.2025

Accounting and Valuation Component of Implementing Nature-Based Solutions

Authors

Serhii Ostapchuk National Scientific Centre "Institute of Agrarian Economics", Kyiv, Ukraine ORCID 0000-0002-2342-6376
Lesya Volyak National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine ORCID 0000-0001-7792-8729

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33146/2518-1181-2025-3(109)-58-69

Abstract

Nature offers solutions to many economic and social problems that increase natural capital and contribute to biodiversity. Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) are individual complex projects, and the costs and results of their implementation are essential objects of accounting and analysis. The article aims to determine the prerequisites for the transition to NBS, to reveal the conceptual principles of designing and implementing such solutions, and the models for assessing and accounting for the results of their implementation. Data for the study were collected through content analysis of research articles from the Scopus database, publications of the UN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, and European institutions such as the European Commission and Eurostat. Thanks to the historical and logical method, the prerequisites for the transition to NBS were determined, which were reflected in international documents and political initiatives. Using the methods of analysis and synthesis, induction and deduction, and abstraction, the authors revealed the conceptual principles of designing and implementing such solutions. The system approach allowed the formation of an integrated model for assessing the effectiveness of NBS. The study’s results confirm the versatility of NBS as an object of accounting, control, and analysis, which requires flexibility, creativity, and a non-standard approach to assessing the implementation’s environmental, economic, and social results. In this regard, in contrast to traditional financial accounting, several alternative accounting models have emerged that form the accounting and evaluation component of NBS implementation. Today, the main accounting models in the world that help measure the effectiveness of NBS and integrate them into state, corporate, or environmental policy are Ecosystem Accounting, Natural Capital Accounting, Carbon Accounting, and Socio-Economic Accounting. To assess NBS in practice, accounting tools and statistical analysis methods are used in combination with modern information technologies for ecosystem surveys, collection, and processing of diverse data, which corresponds to the trend of comprehensive digitalization of management processes. The results of this study contribute to the development of alternative accounting models and form the agenda for further research on accounting and assessment of NBS.

Keywords

ecosystem accounting, natural capital accounting, carbon accounting, socio-economic accounting, cost-benefit analysis methods, accounting models, ecological assets, efficiency assessment
References
  1. Mazur, V. A., & Kovalchuk, S. Ya. (2019). Theory of European Ecological and Economic Development. Vinnytsia: TVORY. Retrieved from: http://socrates.vsau.org/b04213/html/cards/getfile.php/21217.pdf [in Ukrainian]
  2. La Notte, A. (2024). How to account for nature-based solutions as the ecological assets that support economy and society. Nature-Based Solutions, 6, 100164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100164
  3. Cohen-Shacham, E., Andrade, A., Dalton, J., Dudley, N., Jones, M., Kumar, C., ... & Walters, G. (2019). Core principles for successfully implementing and upscaling Nature-based Solutions. Environmental Science & Policy, 98, 20–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2019.04.014
  4. ScienceDirect.com | Advanced search. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/
  5. Chairat, S., & Gheewala, S. H. (2024). The conceptual quantitative assessment framework for Nature-based Solutions (NbS). Nature-Based Solutions, 6, 100152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100152
  6. de Lemos, G. L., de Aquino Eslabão, A., dos Santos, J. F., Rodrigues, A. T., da Costa, L. F., de Medeiros Costa, H. K., ... & dos Santos, E. M. (2024). Nature-based solutions experiences: a systematic literature review for public policies. Nature-Based Solutions, 5, 100121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2024.100121
  7. Chelli, A., Brander, L., & Geneletti, D. (2025). Cost-Benefit analysis of urban nature-based solutions: A systematic review of approaches and scales with a focus on benefit valuation. Ecosystem Services, 71, 101684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101684
  8. Costadone, L., & Zhang, S. (2025). Integrated Valuation of the Ecological, Social and Economic Benefits Provided by a Multifunctional Nature-Based Solution. Nature-Based Solutions, 8, 100256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2025.100256
  9. Alshehri, K., Harbottle, M., Sapsford, D., Beames, A., & Cleall, P. (2023). Integration of ecosystem services and life cycle assessment allows improved accounting of sustainability benefits of nature-based solutions for brownfield redevelopment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 413, 137352. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137352
  10. González-García, A., Palomo, I., Codemo, A., Rodeghiero, M., Dubo, T., Vallet, A., & Lavorel, S. (2025). Co-benefits of nature-based solutions exceed the costs of implementation. Cell Reports Sustainability, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsus.2025.100336
  11. Wild, T., Baptista, M., Wilker, J., Kanai, J. M., Giusti, M., Henderson, H., ... & Kozak, D. (2024). Valuation of urban nature-based solutions in Latin American and European cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 91, 128162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2023.128162
  12. Kireitsev, H. H. (2007). Development of accounting: theory, profession, interdisciplinary connections. Zhytomyr: ZhDTU. [in Ukrainian]
  13. Cassin, J. (2021). History and development of nature-based solutions: concepts and practice. In: Nature-Based Solutions and Water Security (pp. 19-34). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819871-1.00018-X
  14. European Commission. (2015). Towards an EU Research and Innovation policy agenda for Nature-Based Solutions & Re-Naturing Cities. Final Report of the Horizon 2020 Expert Group on 'Nature-Based Solutions and Re-Naturing Cities’ Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2015 Climate Action, Environment, Resource Efficiency and Raw Materials EN (full version). Retrieved from: https://thegreencities.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Nature-Based-Solutions-2015-EC.pdf
  15. IUCN. (n. d.). IUCN Global Standard for Nature-based Solutions. Retrieved from: https://iucn.org/our-work/topic/iucn-global-standard-nature-based-solutions
  16. European Commission. (2025). Nature-based solutions. Retrieved from: https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/research-area/environment/nature-based-solutions_en
  17. Sowińska-Świerkosz, B., & García, J. (2022). What are Nature-based solutions (NBS)? Setting core ideas for concept clarification. Nature-Based Solutions, 2, 100009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbsj.2022.100009
  18. Ecosystem Accounting | System of Environmental Economic Accounting. Retrieved from: https://seea.un.org/ecosystem-accounting
  19. Eurostat. (n. d.). Ecosystem accounts - measuring the contribution of nature to the economy and human wellbeing – Statistics Explained. Retrieved from: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Ecosystem_accounts_-_measuring_the_contribution_of_nature_to_the_economy_and_human_wellbeing
  20. European Commission. (n. d.). Natural capital accounting – Environment. Retrieved from: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/topics/nature-and-biodiversity/natural-capital-accounting_en
  21. Natural Capital Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services Project | System of Environmental Economic Accounting. Retrieved from: https://seea.un.org/home/Natural-Capital-Accounting-Project
  22. Hevchuk, A. V., & Kolesnikova, O. M. (2024). Environmental accounting in the accounting system: place and role in environmental protection. Efektyvna ekonomika, 7. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105.2024.7.8 [in Ukrainian]
  23. Mobley, S. C. (1970). The challenges of socio-economic accounting. The Accounting Review, 45(4), 762–768. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/244213
  24. Linowes, D. F. (1968). Socio-Economic Accounting. Association Sections, Divisions, Boards, Teams. 1109. Retrieved from: https://www.srcc.edu/system/files/Pg%2015-26,%20David%20F%20Linowes,%20Socio-economic%20accounting.pdf
  25. Ostapchuk, S. M., Tsaruk, N. H., & Voliak, L. R. (2024). Ecosystem accounting as a component of managing Ukraineʼs recovery on the basis of sustainable development. Problems of Theory and Methodology of Accounting, Control and Analysis, 2(58), 50–57. https://doi.org/10.26642/pbo-2024-2(58)-50-57 [in Ukrainian]
  26. Sandin, L., Seifert-Dähnn, I., Skumlien Furuseth, I., Baattrup-Pedersen, A., Zak, D., Alkan Olsson, J., ... & Þrastardóttir, R. (2023). Working with Nature-Based Solutions: Synthesis and mapping of status in the Nordics. Nordic Council of Ministers. Retrieved from: https://pub.norden.org/temanord2022-562/#
  27. SEEA Central Framework | System of Environmental Economic Accounting. Retrieved from: https://seea.un.org/content/seea-central-framework
  28. Deegan, C. (2013). The accountant will have a central role in saving the planet… really? A reflection on ‘green accounting and green eyeshades twenty years later’. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 24(6), 448–458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2013.04.004