ИСТИНА

Urban green infrastructure (GI) and protected areas (PAs) are specific nature and cultural spaces in cities exposed to various negative transformations (Benedict, McMahon, 2006). These spaces have a wide range of ecosystem services which are crucial for the nature conservation and citizens at the same time. According to Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) and CICES (Haines-Young, Potschin, 2018), such cultural services as recreation, historic heritage, «sense of place» etc. are included in ecosystem services. However, matter, energy and information balances are rather complicated in urban spaces due to enormous technogenic impact on small areas. Thus, ecosystem and social aspects are in great contradiction in urban environment by now (Trzyna et al., 2014). The total ecosystem value according to zoning established by law and restrictions of human activites (E1) was assessed. Besides, ecosystem value according to actual landscape deterioration through on-site surveys and ability to proceed ecosystem services through InVEST tools (E2) was evaluated (Sharp et al., 2018). Moreover, the cultural value (C) was assessed on the basis of functional zoning, government plans of investments and GI popularity among visitors through Strava data. Differences of E2 and E1, E2 and C were estimated through integral assessment maps in QGIS operations of weighted overlay. The case areas of study are three considerably large (330, 700, 1600 ha) PAs in Moscow (Russia), but it is possible to extend such method to other cities and green areas. Estimated E2-E1 and E2-S values of PAs vary from -5.8 to -1.6 (possible values vary from -20 to 20), what pinpoints the prevalence of cultural services, including not only recreational, but also transport, utility, sport, science, education, sacral ones (Gowdy et al., 2010). The considerable spatial differences have been identified: riparian forests and grasslands, some parts of distant forests are under strong human impact and mild regulations, despite its high ecosystem value (insufficient restrictions). Besides this, a strong tendency of restrictions easing since the 2000s has been revealed – the area-weighted average dynamic parameters vary from to -5.4 to -2.9 (through the scale from-20 to +20). The devised set of methods may be implemented in resolving a dilemma between protection and exploitation and defining the most of gaps in GI planning and management. The expanses of negative E2-E1 values should be thoroughly surveyed and the elements of landscape design should be transmitted to the less disturbing forms: elevated walkways with permeable pavements, construction of strictly limited number of benches, localization of the visitors’ influx in the narrow transport corridors equipped by convenient walkways, benches, litter bins, outdoor lightning. Moreover, all mobile retail objects must be conveyed to the main park entries, occupying biotopes highly transformed already. Besides, all downsizings of urban PAs with area compensation must be prohibited due to rapidly growing biotopes’ fragmentation. At the same time, the social needs of citizens should not be neglected, as total prohibitions on human activities are seemed to be impossible in the contemporary megapolises (Trzyna et al., 2014).