The Development of Scientific Programs in the Field of Interactions Between the Economy and the Environment, as Well as Institutional Prospects

During the last ten years the number of researches in sphere of environmental economics has risen. In this sphere there are two schools with different scientific programs, based on different conceptions of interactions between economics and environment. In the article it is attempted to make a comparative analysis of these scientific programs. It is indicated that during centuries economic science has been studying the problems of interactions between nature, human and society as a subsystem of the common system of life support. The main principle of different scientific programs, concentrating on particular interaction problems, has been established. It is determined that although different schools based on some common theoretical principles and relied on each other achievements, they have different ideas about human interactions. Scientific program of ecological economics has interdisciplinary character, the main idea of which is in saving natural capital which cannot be replaced by physical. The main element of “hard kernel” of this scientific direction is the principle of “strong sustainability”. This idea based on inseparable connection between ecological and social problems. Environmental economics has more strict methodology, which based on neoclassical approaches for the analysis of market failure and prefers “weak sustainability” and has more positive view on natural and physical capital replacement. This approach is universal and is approbated by regulation in another economic sphere. Within neoinstitutional economic theory it is suggested some explanations and solutions of environmental economic problems based on its own understanding of externalities on the assumptions of positive transaction costs and correlation between economic efficiency and allocation of property rights on recourses. Protecting belt of these theoretical directions are extremely” mobile”. The differences arise not only between each direction but inside as well, which are the result of aims, methods and value system. The conclusion is about the distribution of their spheres of influence in current ecological agenda.