Discussion Papers 2009. 
Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins 29-39. p.
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG 
FACTORS BEHIND NEW SPATIAL PATTERNS? 
MAREK DEGÓRSKI 
Introduction 
In the perceptions of many, the environment and landscape have been, and still 
often are, minor parts of the socio-economic system, whose management is fre-
quently in conflict with regional development, both in spatial and purely economic 
terms. Investigation of the link between being green and being successful economi-
cally has thus been a core topic from the spatial management point of view (Walley 
– Whitehead,
 1994; Schaltegger – Figge, 1997; Degórski, 2007, 2008a). It is now 
ever more common for scientists and those involved in the planning of regional 
development to seek out structural solutions that allow a pro-environmental policy 
to be pursued en route to economic success, where the latter is expressed, not 
merely in terms of amounts of resources used, but also in regard to optimised spa-
tial management. Today’s environment is having a value attached to it – inter alia 
through assessment of its potential to generate energy, to supply biotic resources 
and to satisfy people by way of its possession of valuable landscape features 
(Degórski, 2008b). In short, it is being treated as an important factor behind re-
gional economic development, joining with the economic and social factors in de-
termining directions that development is to take, ways in which it is to be achieved, 
means of implementation and consequences. 
The aim of this paper is thus to offer a new view on the environment and its role 
as regards local and regional development, as well as to assess environmental con-
ditions as factors potentially underpinning new spatial patterns. 
The environment as a factor behind regional development 
Since the level of public awareness of the environment is growing in many coun-
tries (and especially those that are most highly-developed), ever greater weight is 
being attached to the role the natural environment plays as an integral part of the 
megasystem of the geographical environment, where this is deemed to encompass 
both the socioeconomic and physical systems. Those two systems are mutually 
interlinked by way of interaction, which is to say that each is to the other as an 
object is to its surroundings (Degórski, 2005). In the context of the structure and 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
 MAREK 
30
DEGÓRSKI 
functioning of geographical space we also perceive the multifunctional nature of 
the natural environment, and the significant role it plays in shaping both human 
quality of life and health. Since these functions are not merely natural or ecological 
in character, but also have clear economic and social sides (not least in terms of 
supply of natural and mineral resources, the absorption of pollutant emissions and 
accumulations of waste and the provisioning of opportunities for rest and recrea-
tion thanks to the resources of habitat and landscape present), it is more and more 
usual for them to be deemed an element in the development of a given region or 
whole country (Łaguna, 2004; Degórski, 2007).  
Because society’s view of the environment’s role has been evolving in many 
countries, opportunities for further improvement in people’s living conditions are 
now deemed to lie, not merely in economic and social development, but also in 
care for the natural environment, this being manifested first and foremost in opti-
misation of the use and management of its potential (Dupont et al. 1998; Berbeka, 
2005; Murphy, 2006). A part of this involves the incorporation into regional policy 
of the idea (at least) of sustainable development, with an awareness that the latter’s 
implementation demands the attendant introduction and pursuit of a series of logis-
tical activities and socioeconomic solutions (WCED, 1987). Where engaged in, 
such activity very often proves a factor capable of activating economic develop-
ment in the given region, this reflecting the need for new investment if the produc-
tion of pro-environmental facilities is to be engaged in, infrastructure in water, 
wastewater and waste management built or modernized, and new solutions applied 
in power supply and transport. There is thus an inevitable development of such 
economic sectors as construction, commerce, transport and services. 
It is most easy to note the need for action to optimise the quality of the natural 
environment and the capital-intensiveness thereof in countries most seriously be-
hind when it comes to introducing sustainable development principles. The CEECs 
offer a very good example here. Prior to their EU pre-accession and accession peri-
ods, these countries pursued a characteristically liberal policy as regards care for 
the natural environment, particularly when it came to the limiting or minimising of 
the negative impact of anthropopressure on the functioning of the natural system. 
The inclusion of these states into EC structures required their adoption of regula-
tions in force in the Union, including as regards the protection and management of 
the environment in line with sustainable development principles. Adjustments of 
the basic standards as regards environmental quality have been requiring huge fi-
nancial outlays. As of the end of 2003, the necessary funding to achieve goals 
arising from the environmental acquis was found to amount to between almost 
12% of the GDPs achieved by Lithuania and Slovenia and some 71% of the GDP 
generated by Estonia (Degórski, 2007). 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND… 
31 
The concept of the relation between outlays on the environment 
and economic effects 
The complexity of the environment-society-economy system is such that the search 
is on for attractors, i.e. equilibrium points attracting each trajectory of a given dy-
namic system, notwithstanding the fact that non-linearity of socio-natural relations 
is a factor in certain conditions creating systems characterised by metastability 
(Domański, 2008). The potential of the natural environment may thus be regarded 
as one of the more important functional elements to the ecological and social sys-
tem (Glasson, 2000; Morris – Therivel, 2000; Degórska – Degórski, 2003), being 
the generator of its development and thus capable of giving the measurable and 
definable economic effects that shape new patterns in multifunctional geographical 
space (Degórski, 2003, 2007). 
Today the environmental economy is associated with a diversity of views on the 
economic impacts of pro-environmental investments, particularly those associated 
with the protection of the environment and the landscape and the effort to maintain 
or raise an area’s attractiveness. In line with the model for the attainment of eco-
nomic success as set against outlays on the protection and optimal utilisation of 
environmental resources (as developed by Schaltegger – Synnestvedt, 2002), there 
are three possibilities through which relations between outlays and obtained effects 
are likely to be shaped. Each of the presented solutions has its advocates and oppo-
nents. However, precise analysis of the solutions proposed by the aforementioned 
authors makes it clear that all of them are possible, the actual economic effect ob-
tained being dependent on a series of conditioning factors both endogenous and 
exogenous (Figure 1).  
The courses to the curves show very clearly that increased outlays on integrated 
protection of the environment and the landscape do not automatically bring meas-
urable attendant benefits for the economy. Indeed, there are cases in which, not-
withstanding the increasing of outlays (line C-B-A), the final effect is the same, 
which is to say that the curve is found at the point of departure for economic suc-
cess (ESo). Frequently, however, pro-environmental investment does bring meas-
urable economic success and generates measurable benefits (as curves achieve 
point ES). Some environmental economists thus assume a straight line relationship 
whereby profits increase directly with outlays on optimising the protection and 
utilisation of the environment’s potential (dashed line). 
There is of course no straight translation from outlays deployed to profits ob-
tained in the context of the protection and utilisation of the potential of the envi-
ronment. All types of activity in the defined spatial unit must meet three main con-
ditions, i.e. 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
 MAREK 
32
DEGÓRSKI 
  possess a very precise valuation of environmental potential – first and fore-
most as that relates to natural resources and the landscape, and hence allows 
for precisely defined protection of its most valuable fragments; 
  have a defined development strategy that takes account of the optimal utilisa-
tion of natural potential, making reference to the sustainable development 
concept providing for the rational management of natural space;  
  see account taken – in general policy for a region’s development – of the 
separate sectoral policies, where these include such an environmental policy 
as will allow assumed economic goals to be achieved, while pro-environ-
mental solutions are retained and able to impact upon the quality of life. 
Figure 1  
Possible relations between between corporate environment protection and 
economic success 
 
Source: According: Schalteggera and Synnestvedta, 2002. 
In the highly-developed countries, ever more attention is being paid to quality 
of life, this reflecting the role of a high-quality of the environment and aesthetically 
valuable landscape features when it comes to the development of the residential 
function, as well as the quality of food produced, high-quality drinking water and 
clean air. The achievement of ever higher standards of living requires that deci-
sionmakers pay more and more attention to the spatial order, and to the sorting out 
of the relationships ongoing between rural and urban space.  
In constructing a model for outlays on the environment as against economic 
success, it is necessary to determine also the so-called maximum incremental social 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND… 
33 
tolerance irreversible costs (MISTIC) index, since this provides for an assessment 
of the level of readiness in society (not least in its organizations introducing green 
solutions, if often only at great expense). 
The urban-rural relationship 
One of the main factors influencing the shaping of structures in geographical space 
is the development of areas of both urban and rural settlement, as well as of the 
spatial and functional linkages between them. The sprawling of urbanised areas 
leads to the anthropisation of the environment and the fragmentation of natural 
space, and thereby to a weakening of both the cohesion of natural-system linkages 
and the environment’s biotic potential. In Poland, areas that have undergone 
marked anthropogenic transformation currently account for some 4.8% of the 
country, while the rate of increase is at present of 0.1% per decade on average. 
From among the directions as regards the re-designation of agricultural and forest 
land for non-agricultural purposes, there is a particularly noticeable increase in the 
share of designated orchard land (from 26.4% in 1990 to 47.7% in 2006). Other 
trends to changes in land function tend to fluctuate much more (e.g. when it comes 
to transport and/or industrial functions).  
Within spatial development and the functional relationship ongoing between 
rural and urban areas it is possible to distinguish three main stages of interaction 
between the two categories of spatial structure (Figure 2). The first is characteristic 
for the state of both rural and urban structures taking shape – in which there is not 
yet any spatial limitation on development, while the linkage between countryside 
and town is mainly in the nature of a producer-client relationship. In the history of 
world economic development, these features were characteristic of the stage at 
which towns and villages were first located. Today it is confined to areas of low 
population density and weak economic development. With time, there is spatial 
development of urbanised areas as both towns and villages develop. There arises a 
greater functional dependence between city and countryside, as well as an overall 
development of areas settled. The result of this is ever more far-reaching fragmen-
tation of the natural environment, and its anthropisation. The further development 
of settled areas both rural and urban leads to the ever-greater spatial integration of 
the two. This stage of development thus witnesses a blurring of the boundaries 
between settlement units, clear cases of urban sprawl, and hence very much en-
hanced pressure imposed by human beings on the natural environment. The shap-
ing of a new spatial structure requires that planners take great heed of the need for 
spatial order. For even in such anthropogenically transformed environmental con-
ditions, order remains a factor of significance creating a new pattern in space and 
determining the value of land. If we take care to ensure a high-quality environment 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
 MAREK 
34
DEGÓRSKI 
that maintains high sanitary standard and retains valuable landscape features, then 
the capital invested in undertakings of the above kind can be expected to bring a 
measurable economic effect.  
Figure 2  
Relationship between rural and urban areas 
integrated 
p
 
tionshi
e
la
b
a
n r
l-ur
u
ra
unlimited 
linked
R
Time 
 
Source: Author’s own construction. 
Energy supply 
A further conditioning arising out of the environment’s potential and capable of 
influencing the structure of geographical space and the landscape concerns the 
energy potential it is associated with. That potential is expressed in terms of the 
non-renewable and renewable energetic raw materials. It is very much upon the 
breakdown to the use of the different resources and the ways in which they are won 
that the quality of the environment and attractiveness of the landscape depend to a 
very great degree. Today, for example, there are many local communities asking 
themselves about the aesthetic environmental costs of wind farms or the creation of 
other new spatial structures (Niecikowski – Kistowski, 2008). However, the most 
important issue from the point of view of the functioning of the environment is the 
breakdown for the use of the different fuels, these ranging across from the fossil 
fuels to the renewable energy sources (Figure 3).  
The process by which energy-consumption structures evolve displays clear pe-
riods of stabilisation and marked variability. The latter are induced by such exter-
nal determinants as rising demand, the discovery of new energy sources and con-
cern for the environment. 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND… 
35 
Figure 3  
Transition of energy space – phases and stability 
Renovable 
energy space 
is explicit 
Unrenovable 
energy space is 
explicit 
Fossil energy  
space is implicit 
 
Source: Authors own construction. 
Energy demand is determined by factors such as economic activity, weather 
conditions and behavioural patterns among consumers. In order for the use made of 
different sources of energy to be optimised, energy and environmental models are 
applied, their task being to obtain the maximum profit in economic terms, while 
minimising negative impacts for the environment. As R. Domański (2006) noted, 
energy can be embodied as a common denominator for both ecological and eco-
nomic formulae. Many countries’ interest in using these models to generate socio-
economic policy only gained in significance in the wake of the energy crisis of the 
1970s. At that time, the public was made aware of the real prospect that non-re-
newable energy resources might run out, while the increase in energy prices was 
seen to be an unpredictable one. In turn, there was a defining and scientific demon-
stration of the negative impacts on the environment associated with the burning of 
fossil fuels, especially the solid fuels. Thus people started to try and optimize the 
use of energy sources, and to lower the rate of increase in energy consumption vis-
à-vis the rate of growth in GDP. Thus, for example, in the EU-15, the years 1995 – 
2001 brought a 17% increase in GDP, in association with just a 5% rise in energy 
consumption. In the years just prior to that it had still been the case that energy 
consumption had to grow faster than the rate at which GDP was increasing (Envi-
ronmental Signals
, 2004). Unfortunately, however, the energy-intensiveness to be 
noted in the new Member States differed markedly from that among the old Fif-
teen. The lowest indicator for energy-intensiveness in 2006 (as expressed in terms 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
 MAREK 
36
DEGÓRSKI 
of TOE/GDP) was characteristic of Denmark (c. 100). At the same time, the aver-
age calculated for the Fifteen was of c. 200 points. In comparison, Poland’s figure 
is of more than 450, while that for the 10 new Member States acceding in 2004 
taken together was of more than 700 points. 
Following its 2007 enlargement to 27 countries, the EU with its 500M+ inhabi-
tants was making use of around 18% of the world’s energy. The dominant fuel in 
EU countries is oil (40% of total consumption), though the fastest-growing source 
is natural gas, for which the EU now accounts for over 25% of all consumption. 
Natural gas usage has increased through both higher overall demand for energy and 
a decline in the relative role played by coal consumption from 20% in 1991 to 16% 
in 2007 (Austvik, 2007; Eurostat, 2008) Nuclear energy output has been quite sta-
ble, accounting for around 13% of total energy consumption. HEP offers a further 
4%, while renewable sources taken together (wind, geothermal, solar, biofuels, 
etc.) account for just 2%. What this shows is that the fossil fuels (oil, gas and coal) 
continue to account for almost 83% of the energy consumed in the EU countries. 
This in turn necessitates a further, far-reaching transformation in the use made of 
the different raw materials, in order that an optimal solution from the points of both 
the environment and the economy can be arrived at. Obviously, changes of this 
kind will bring attendant evolution of the spatial structure, as well as the creation of 
new patterns in line with optimisation of the use made of the environment’s poten-
tial, including as regards renewables. 
Ecosystems services 
As human populations grow, so do the resource demands imposed on ecosystems, 
and the impacts of our global footprint. Our human use of natural resources began 
from the moment of our appearance on Earth and has never stopped growing since. 
However, the increase in the level of anthropopressure being imposed upon the 
environment is not linear in nature, but goes through stages of stabilisation, as well 
as of very much reintensified pressure. An example of a period of very strong an-
thropopressure on the environment was of course provided by the Industrial Revo-
lution. The 20th century also witnessed humanity’s very severe exertion of pressure 
on the environment, this reflecting the geometric increase in the human population 
and the attendant needs to produce food, to obtain sources of energy and to find 
space to meet the needs of the settlement network. The pressure in question trans-
formed ecosystems greatly, though it also made people aware that the latter of 
themselves possess a certain potential from which benefit can be drawn.  
Specifically, humankind benefits from a multitude of resources and processes 
that are supplied by natural ecosystems. Collectively, these benefits are known as 
ecosystem services, and include products like clean drinking water and processes 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND… 
37 
like the decomposition of wastes. Ecosystem services are distinct from other eco-
system products and functions because there is human demand for these natural 
assets. Services can be subdivided into five categories:  
  provisioning, such as the production of food and water;  
  regulating, such as the control of climate and disease;  
  supporting, such as nutrient cycles and crop pollination;  
  cultural, such as spiritual and recreational benefits;  
  preserving which includes guarding against uncertainty through the mainte-
nance of diversity. 
In considering the relationship between humankind and the environment in 
ever-greater detail, some authors (like Holdren – Ehrlich, 1974; Ehrlich, P. R.  – 
Ehrlich A. H., 
1981) show how ecosystem services support life through: 
  the purification of air and water,  
  the mitigation of droughts and floods,  
  the generation and preservation of soils and renewal of their fertility,  
  the detoxification and decomposition of wastes,  
  the pollination of crops and natural vegetation,  
  the dispersal of seeds,  
  the cycling and movement of nutrients,  
  the control of the vast majority of potential agricultural pests,  
  the maintenance of biodiversity,  
  the protection of shores from erosion by waves,  
  protection from the sun's harmful ultraviolet rays,  
  the partial stabilization of climate,  
  the moderation of weather extremes and their impacts,  
  the provision of aesthetic beauty and intellectual stimulation uplifting of the  
human spirit.  
Consequently, society is coming to realize, not only that ecosystem services are 
threatened and limited, but also that there is an urgent need to evaluate trade-offs 
between immediate and long-term human needs. This is, for example, true of the 
need to estimate the pedosphere’s capacity to supply enough food in the form of 
crops for the inhabitants of given regions of our planet (Myers, 1983; Prescott-
Allen, R. – Prescott-Allen C.,
 1990).  To help inform decision-makers, economic 
value is increasingly being attached to a wide range of ecosystem services, this 
often being based on the cost of replacement by anthropogenically-driven alterna-
tives. The ongoing challenge of ascribing economic value to nature is prompting 
transdisciplinary shifts in how we recognize and manage the environment, in social 
responsibility, in business opportunities, and ultimately in our future as a species. 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
 MAREK 
38
DEGÓRSKI 
Conclusions 
The presentation here of selected issues associated with the shaping of interrela-
tionships between the natural environment, society, the economy and culture, and 
capable of conditioning spatial development, makes it very clear that the system of 
the natural environment is a fully-fledged player in the shaping of new spatial pat-
terns and in the setting of directions to spatial development and regional economic 
development. It has now come to be important for the economic aspect to planning 
and accounting vis-à-vis spatial policy to take account of the potential of the natu-
ral environment, as well as optimisation of the latter’s use. This is particularly the 
case when it comes to functional conceptualisations of socio-economic systems. 
Society’s demographic development plus growing pressure on the environment 
resulting in ever greater fragmentation plus impairment of natural resistance to 
external factors ensure that there is an increasing demand for areas in which the 
landscape has only been transformed to a limited extent. In line with the increase in 
the number of inhabitants, the exhaustion of mineral resources and the reduction in 
the area of arable land, we are witnessing increases, not only in the prices of non-
renewable mineral resources, but also in the prices of food – especially organic 
food (i.e. that produced traditionally, without the agents intensifying production). 
In this context, the environment is emerging as one of the basic determinants 
shaping the structure and development of space. 
References 
Austvik, O. 2007: Energy challenges for Europe. Structural Change in Europe. 5. pp. 52–54. 
Berbeka, K. 2005: Konsekwencje wdrażania dyrektyw ekologicznych UE dla konsumpcji gospodarstw 
domowych w Polsce [Consequences of implementation of EU directives for consumptions in 
households].   Kraków, Wyd. AE w Krakowie. 
Degórska, B. – Degórski, M. 2003: The environmental dimension of European space according to the 
concept of trajectory. Europa. 8. pp. 37–44. 
Degórski, M. 2003: Some aspects of multifunctional landscape character in the interdisciplinary 
environmental study. In: Helming, K. – Wiggering, H. (eds.): Sustainable development of 
Multifunctional Landscapes
. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer–Verlag. pp. 53–65. 
Degórski, M. 2005: Środowisko przyrodnicze a środowisko geograficzne [Natural environment 
versus geographical environment]. In: Maik, W. – K. Rembowska, K. – Suliborski, A. (eds.): 
Geografia jako nauka o przestrzeni, środowisku i krajobrazie. Podstawowe Idee i Koncepcje w 
Geografii
. 1. pp. 116–129. 
Degórski, M. 2006: Podstawy teoretyczne systemowego ujęcia badań  środowiska przyrodniczego i 
geograficznego oraz ich znaczenie dla rozwiązań aplikacyjnych [Theoretical assumption of 
system’s understanding of environment study and its meaning for practical solutions]. Problemy 
Ekologii Krajobrazu
. 1. pp. 37–48. 
Degórski, M. 2007: Environmental conditions as a driving force of regional development in Poland, 
In: Kovács, A. D. (ed.): Regionality and/or LocalityDiscussion Papers Special. Pécs, Center for 
Regional Studies of Hungarian Academy of Sciences. pp. 67–80. 
 

Marek Degórski : Are Environmental Conditions Among Factors Behind New Spatial Patterns? 
In:  Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins. 
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 29-39. p. Discussion Papers, Special 
 
ARE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS AMONG FACTORS BEHIND… 
39 
Degórski, M. 2008a: Environmental dimension of transboundary spatial development –  driving 
forces in the ecological regionalism. In:  M. Leibenath, – E. Korcelli-Olejniczak, – R. 
Knippschild,  (eds.), Cross-border Governance and Sustainable Spatial Development, Mind the 
Gaps!
 Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Central and Eastern European Development  Studies, 
Springer–Verlag pp. 161–173. 
Degórski, M. 2008b: Polityka ekologiczna w zarządzaniu regionem (Ecological policy in regional 
management). In: Stryjakiewicz, T., Czyż, T.  (eds.): O nowy kształt badań  regionalnych w 
geografii i gospodarce przestrzennej.
 Biuletyn KPZK, 237. Polska Akademia Nauk, 237, pp. 50–
72. 
Domański, R. 2006: Gospodarka przestrzenna, podstawy teoretyczne [Spatial management, 
theoretical bases]. Warszawa, PWN. 
Domański, R. 2008: Przyczynek do modelowania rozwoju zrównoważonego w długim okresie, 
[Contribution to the modeling of sustainable development in long term]. In: Stryjakiewicz, T. –
Czyż, T. (eds.): O nowy kształt badań  regionalnych w geografii i gospodarce przestrzennej, 
Biuletyn KPZK
. 237. Polska Akademia Nauk. 237. pp. 203–224. 
Dupont, R. – Baxter T. – Theodore L. 1998: Environmental management, problems and solutions. 
Boca Raton, Boston, London, New York, Washington DC, Lewis Publishers. 
Ehrlich, P. R.  – Ehrlich, A. H. 1981: Extinction, Ballantine, New York. Environmental Signals, 
2004:  A European Environment Agency update on selected issue. Copenhagen, European 
Environment Agency. 
Eurostat 2008: Eurostat Yearbook. Brussels, European Commission. 
Glasson, J. 2000: Socio-economic impacts. In: Socio-economic impact assessment (SIA). London, 
New York, Spon Press, pp. 20–41. 
Holdren, J. P. – Ehrlich P. R.  1974: Human population and the global environment. American 
Scientist. 62. pp. 282–292. 
Łaguna, T. 2004: Ekonomiczne podstawy zarządzania  środowiskiem i zasobami naturalnymi 
[Economical bases for the environmental management and natural resources]. Ekonomiczne i 
Ekologiczne  Aspekty Gospodarki Przestrzennej
. Olsztyn. 
Meyer, B. – Degórski, M. 2007: Integration of multifunctional goals into land use – the planning 
perspective. In: Mander, U. – Wiggering, H. – Helming, K. (eds.): Multifunctional land use, 
meeting future demands for landscape goods and services
. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 
Springer, pp. 153–166. 
Morris, P. – Therivel, R. 2000: Methods of environmental impact assessment. London, New York, 
Spon Press. 
Murphy, A. 2006: Enhancing Geography's Role in Public Debate. Annals of the Association of 
American Geographers. 1. pp. 1–13. 
Myers,  N.  1997:  The  worlds  forests  and  their  ecosystem  services.  In:  Daily,  G.  (ed.):    Nature’s 
Services:  Societal  Dependence  on  Natural  Ecosystems.  Washington  DC,  Island  Press,  pp.    215–
235. 
Myers, N. 1983: Wealth of Wild Species. Boulder, CO, Westview Press.  
Prescott-Allen, R. – Prescott-Allen C. 1990: How many plants feed the world? Conservation Biology 
4. pp. 365–374.  
Schaltegger, S. – Figge, F. 1997: Environmental shareholder value, economic success with corporate 
environmental management. Eco-Management and Auditing. 7. pp. 29–42. 
Schaltegger, S. – Synnestvedt, T. 2002: The link between green and economic success: environmental 
management as the crucial trigger between environmental and economic performance. Journal of 
Environmental Management
. 65. pp. 339–346. 
Walley, N. – Whitehead, R. 1994: It is not easy being green. Harvard Business Review. 72. p. 46 –52. 
WCED, 1987: Sustainable Development, Brundtland Report. World Commission on Environment 
and Development.