рус eng
«IZVESTIYA IRKUTSKOGO GOSUDARSTVENNOGO UNIVERSITETA». SERIYA «NAUKI O ZEMLE»
«THE BULLETIN OF IRKUTSK STATE UNIVERSITY». SERIES «EARTH SCIENCES»
ISSN 2073-3402 (Print)

List of issues > Series «Earth Sciences». 2025. Vol 54

The Role of Specially Protected Natural Areas in Preserving the Ecological Diversity of the Transboundary Zone Alongside the Asian Border of Russia

Author(s)

N. N. Alekseeva, M. V. Mostinskaya-Pliner

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russian Federation

Abstract
Studies of the conservation potential of transboundary areas are conducted at the global, macroregional and regional levels, with an emphasis on strengthening the connectivity of protected areas. The objective of the study is to analyze the coverage of ecological regions and key biodiversity areas by specially protected natural areas (SPNA) in the border zone of Russia and adjacent Asian states. The article assesses the 100-kilometer border zone along the Asian border of the Russian Federation and a similar zone in neighboring countries – Kazakhstan, China, and Mongolia. An inventory was made for each of the four countries based on GIS analysis using international and national geospatial databases. The total area of protected areas within ecological regions (22 in total) and key biodiversity areas (103) was calculated, and their share in the border zones of the countries under study was determined. Ecological regions with a high, medium and low share of protected areas (less than 14 %) were identified. The most favorable situation with the coverage of ecoregions by protection has developed in the Mongolian part of the border zone. Calculations of the share of protection of key biodiversity areas have shown that they are least protected in the Russian border zone, and most fully protected in the Kazakh one. The assessments have shown the inadequacy of the territorial nature protection system in the border zone of Russia, which must be taken into account in further planning of nature protection, including within the framework of transboundary protected areas. There are currently 5 transboundary protected areas, and it is planned to create new interstate nature conservation objects in the Russian-Mongolian and Russian-Chinese border zones. Thus, the conducted assessments of the representation of protected areas in border zones for different operationalterritorial units of ecological and biological diversity reflect their different contributions to nature conservation of four countries. The approach used can serve as a basis for identifying territories that are important from the point of view of expanding the territorial system of nature conservation and creating transboundary protected areas.
About the Authors

Alekseeva Nina Nikolaevna, Candidate of Sciences (Geography), Associate Professor, Faculty of Geography Lomonosov Moscow State University 1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation e-mail: nalex01@mail.ru

Mostinskaya-Pliner Maria Vitalievna, Undegraduate, Faculty of Geography Lomonosov Moscow State University 1, Leninskie Gory, Moscow, 119991, Russian Federation e-mail: m.mostinskaya-pliner@yandex.ru

For citation
Alekseeva N.N., Mostinskaya-Pliner M.V. The Role of Specially Protected Natural Areas in Preserving the Ecological Diversity of the Transboundary Zone Alongside the Asian Border of Russia. The Bulletin of Irkutsk State University. Series Earth Sciences, 2025, vol. 54, pp. 3-21. https://doi.org/10.26516/2073-3402.2025.54.3 (in Russian)
Keywords
specially protected natural areas, ecological regions, key biodiversity areas, border zone of Russia, transboundary protected areas, GIS analysis.
UDC
502.4(571.100)
DOI
https://doi.org/10.26516/2073-3402.2025.54.3
References
  1. Biksaleev A.A., Novikov A.N. Mezhdunarodnye transgranichnye trexzvennye regiony: teoreticheskoe obobshhenie opyta integracii prigranichnyh osobo oxranyaemyh prirodnyh territorij [International transboundary three-tier regions: theoretical generalization of the experience of integration of border specially protected natural territories]. Uspexi sovremennogo estestvoznaniya [Achievements of modern natural science], 2021, no. 12, pp. 95-100. https://doi.org/10.1751/use/37742/ (in Russian) 
  2. Ogureeva G.N., Leonova N.B., Miklyaeva I.M. et al. Bioraznoobrazie biomov Rossii. Ravninnye biomy [Biodiversity of biomes of Russia. Plain biomes]. Ed. by G.N. Ogureeva. Moscow, IGKE Publ., 2020, 623 p. (in Russian) 
  3. Kalikhman T.P. Proektirovanie transgranichnogo ob``ekta Vsemirnogo prirodno-kulturnogo naslediya Sayanskij perekrestok [Geografiya i prirodny`e resursy [Design of the transboundary World Natural and Cultural Heritage site Sayan Crossroads]. Geografiya i prirodnye resursy [Geography and Natural Resources], 2019, no. 5S. pp. 45-51. https://doi.org/10.21782/GIPR0206-1619-2019-5(45-51). (in Russian) 
  4. Kalikhman T.P., Bardash A.V., E`nx-Angalan S. Oxranyaemy`e prirodny`e territorii Sibiri i Mongolii: sravnitelnyj analiz [Protected natural areas of Siberia and Mongolia: a comparative analysis]. Geografiya i prirodnye resursy [Geography and Natural Resources], 2022, no. 2, pp. 13-24. https://doi.org/10.15372/GIPR20220202 (in Russian) 
  5. Oyuunge’rel B. Sistema osobo oxranyaemyh prirodnyh territoriĭ Mongolii i perspektivy` eyo razvitiya [The system of specially protected natural areas of Mongolia and the prospects for its development]. Aridnye ekosistemy [Arid ecosystems], 2010, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 57-66. (in Russian) 
  6. Darman Yu.A., Zharikov V.V., Karakin V.P. et al. Prioritety rossijsko-kitajskogo sotrudnichestva po soxraneniyu bioraznoobraziya v transgranichny`x geosistemax yuga Dal`nego Vostoka Rossii i Severo-Vostochnogo Kitaya [Priorities of Russian-Chinese cooperation in preserving biodiversity in transboundary geosystems of the Far East of Russia and North-East China]. Geografiya i prirodnye resursy [Geography and nature resources], 2024, no. 5S, pp. 42-51. https://doi.org/10.15372/GIPR20240505 (in Russian) 
  7. Savenkova T.P., Oyuungerel B. Transgranichn`e oxranyaemye prirodnye territorii Bajkalskogo regiona [Transboundary Protected Natural Areas of the Baikal Region]. Problemy transgranichnyh territorij [Problems of Transboundary Territories], Vladivostok, Pacific Institute of Geography FEB RAS, 2004, pp. 343-346. (in Russian) 
  8. Dinerstein E., Olson D., Joshi A. et al. An Ecoregion-Based Approach to Protecting Half the Terrestrial Realm. BioScience, 2017, vol. 67, pp. 534-545. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix014 
  9. Baillie J., Zhang Y.-P. Space for nature. Science, 2018, vol. 361, 6407, p. 1051. 
  10. Biodiversity and climate change. Scientific Outcome of the IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop, 2021, 232 p. 
  11. An L., Shen L., Zhong S. et al. Conservation effects of transboundary protected areas on mitigating anthropogenic pressure across China's borders. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2025, vol. 212, 107976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.107976 
  12. Groves C., Valutis L., Vosick D. et al. Designing a Geography of Hope: A Practitioner’s Handbook for Ecoregional Conservation Planning. Special ed., 2 vols. The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, Virginia, 2000. 
  13. Ascensão F., Fahrig L., Clevenger A.P. et al. Environmental challenges for the belt and road initiative. Nature Sustainability, 2018, vol. 1 (5), pp. 206-209. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0059-3 
  14. Robillard C.M., Coristine L.E., Soares R.N. et al. Facilitating climate-change-induced range shifts across continental land-use barriers. Conservation Biology, 2015, vol. 29, iss. 6, pp. 1586- 1595. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12556 
  15. Mason N., Ward M., Watson J. E. M. et al. Global opportunities and challenges for transboundary conservation. Nat. Ecol. Evol., 2020, vol. 4, pp. 694-701. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-1160-3
  16. Кalikhman Т.P. Review of the current state of territorial nature protection in Siberia and Mongolia. Geography and water resources, 2023, no. 2, pp. 48-59. https://doi.org/10.55764/2957-9856/2023-2-48-59.11 
  17. Peters R., Ripple W.J., Wolf C. et al. Nature divided, scientists United: US–Mexico border wall threatens biodiversity and binational conservation. Bioscience, 2018, vol. 68, pp. 740-743. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy063
  18. Nelson A., Chomitz K.M. Effectiveness of Strict vs. Multiple Use Protected Areas in Reducing Tropical Forest Fires: A Global Analysis Using Matching Methods. PLOS ONE 6, 2011, e22722. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0022722
  19. Penagos Gaviria M.; Kaszta Z., Farhadinia M. S. Structural Connectivity of Asia’s Protected Areas Network: Identifying the Potential of Transboundary Conservation and Cost-Effective Zones. ISPRS Int. J.Geo-Inf., 2022, vol. 11, 408. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11070408
  20. Peters R., Ripple W.J., Wolf C. et al. Nature divided, scientists United: US–Mexico border wall threatens biodiversity and binational conservation. Bioscience, 2018, vol. 68, pp. 740-743. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy063
  21. Liu J., Yong D. L., Choi C.-Y. et al. Transboundary Frontiers: An Emerging Priority for Biodiversity Conservation. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 2020, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 679-690. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.03.004. 
  22. An L., Shen L., Zhong S. et al. Transboundary ecological network identification for addressing conservation priorities and landscape ecological risks: Insights from the Altai Mountains. Ecological Indicators, 2023, vol. 56, 111159. 
  23. Wilson K.A., Carwardine J., Possingham H.P. Setting Conservation Priorities. Year in Ecology and Conservation Biology, 2009, 1162, pp. 237-264.

Full text (russian)