Protection of public's ecological concerns: current status and prospects for improvement

. The contemporary ecological situation in Russia is negatively influenced by economic and sanitary-hygienic factors, which can be defined as insufficiently prosperous. In addition, emergencies arising as a result of accidental circumstances or insufficient compliance with environmental safety requirements, violation of work rules, use of obsolete or environmentally hazardous equipment make a certain "contribution" to its deterioration. Provided that the national economy is characterized by a varied diversity and optimistic growth rates, one cannot but notice that most sources of formation of the state welfare are ecologically harmful, contribute to the maintenance in an ecologically unfavorable condition of industrial facilities and adjacent territories, the formation of a significant mass of production and consumption waste. With the proclamation in Article 42 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation of the right of everyone to a prosperous environment, the state has the obligation to create appropriate legal instruments to implement this right and to maintain ecological safety at a high level. Nevertheless, due to the high degree of natural resource exploitation that persists to the present day, the rate at which these instruments are created is clearly inferior to the rate at which the negative impact on the natural environment is increasing. In the article a quantitative analysis of the risks and threats to the ecological interests of society arising in connection with anthropogenic impact on the environment and a qualitative analysis of the norms of the current legislation aimed at maintaining their protected state are carried out. Their results confirm the need for further improvement of legal instruments adequately protecting the environmental well-being of the population.


Introduction
The environmental situation in Russia is not sufficiently favourable.The negative impact of a whole set of factors significantly complicates the improvement of the quality of the natural environment.Many developed countries have faced this problem, and most of them have chosen the strategy of reducing industrial production [1], changing the general trends of conditional settlement [2] and environmental risk management [3].A more progressive approach has become its ecologization, which is clearly illustrated by the experience of the People's Republic of China [4], or the construction of "smart economy" practiced in some European countries [5].In Russia, due to the economic turmoil that occurred after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the implementation of the most expensive but undoubtedly environmentally beneficial projects was impossible for a long time.
The negative impact of anthropogenic activities remains significant, even though industrial production has decreased significantly compared to the 1980s, and many industries have since gained modern equipment that causes less damage to certain natural components.For example, such leading sectors of the Russian economy as trade (over 15% of the volume), energy export (over 15%), manufacturing (about 14%), mining (about 10%) and transport (about 7%) pose many environmental risks and cause supernumerary damage to the environment (with only 11% of organisations whose activities are linked to potential environmental impacts using environmental innovations).However, according to the World Bank, the reorientation of part of the Russian economy toward the production of "green" products (compliant with environmental requirements or intended for environmental monitoring) may become an actual direction of its development (however, at the moment the share of "green" goods sold by domestic producers does not exceed 1.7% of the total structure).Foreign studies in this regard support such a vector, especially in connection with the good faith compliance of Russia with international agreements of environmental nature [6], however, it is obvious that the maintenance of environmental security requires permanent efforts on the part of the society and the state.
The volume of waste generation from production and consumption, according to Rosstat, of the most important types of economic activity for the period 2016 to 2020 tends to increase, interrupted only in 2020.This intermediate outcome can rather be explained by the general economic downturn, which took place against the backdrop of the Covid-19 pandemic, causing significant disruption to all sectors of the economy (in particular, Russia had a long period of non-working days in 2020, when the activities of a number of industries were halted).The slowdown in production naturally led to a reduction in the amount of waste produced.Similar effects of the pandemic have been recorded in foreign studies [7], especially in connection with climate change -one of the important components of environmental security [8].In any case, the increase in production and consumption waste in 2019 compared to 2016 was 16.5%, in 2020, despite the decrease in production -5.5%.At the same time, in such types of production and consumption as the production of food, beverages, chemicals, and chemical products, as well as water supply; water disposal, organisation of waste collection and disposal, pollution elimination activities, the upward trend of production and consumption waste generation is characterised by consistency and high rates.
The information provided above clearly demonstrates that environmental problems are not always adequately addressed.The latter, in turn, should involve government funding of industrial modernisation with priority given to the use of environmentally neutral or safe equipment, the establishment of a system of environmental payments taking into account the risk of environmental damage, and management decisions aimed at preventing harm to the components of nature and public health.In 2019, environmental protection costs amounted to 37441.1 million roubles, an increase of 8.4% compared to 2018 -34546.4 million roubles.In 2019, enterprises belonging to the economic activity "manufacturing" made the largest contribution to the total amount of running costs -RUB 14986.6 million, or about 40% of the total.The second place according to this indicator was held by the enterprises belonging to the type of economic activities "water supply, sewerage, organization of waste collection and disposal, activities on liquidation of pollution" -113495.8 million rubles or 30.3% of the total volume.The least expenses were incurred by types of economic activities "mining and quarrying" -57036.8 million rubles or 15.2%, "provision of electric power, gas and steam; air conditioning" -24581.1 million rubles or 6.6%, "agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishery and fish farming" -2339.2 million rubles or 0.6%, "transportation and storage" -10570.2 million rubles or 2.8% (Fig. 1).In the offered article the attempt is undertaken to estimate the condition of protection of the ecological interests of a society in interrelation with the given above rather negative indicators characterizing an ecological situation in Russia, volumes of the anthropogenous influence on environment and quality of the norms of the operating legislation, directed on protection of ecological safety.This is of both theoretical and practical interest, since this issue has not received a detailed understanding in the scientific literature, while the constitutional right to live in an environmentally safe environment is guaranteed to everyone.The indicators of the protection of society's environmental interests are considered on the basis of statistical data, the results of sociological measurements, the materials of law enforcement practice and legal instruments that exist in various branches of Russian law.Using the formal-legal method, an attempt is made to assess the effectiveness of the state's maintenance of environmental security as one of the foundations of Russia's development strategy and the conservation of natural resources for future generations.

The state of the protection of society's ecological concerns
When analysing the state of protection of society's environmental interests, it is necessary to pay attention to the fact that on 14 November 2017.Rosstat approved a Comprehensive System of Statistical Indicators of Environmental Protection of the Russian Federation, taking into account international recommendations.It takes into account various sources of information, including data from Rosstat, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the federal services it coordinates (Rosprirodnadzor, Roshydromet, Rosvodresursy, Rosleskhoz, etc.), Rospotrebnadzor, the executive authorities authorized to perform legal regulation in the sphere of transport services provision.In addition, UN  System: the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs provides information on the status of environmental crime by type of environmental crime, while Rosreestr provides information on the number of detected violations of land legislation (actually, the results of administrative practice).Accordingly, administrative offences in the field of environmental management are not included in the single array of offences, which somewhat impoverishes the overall picture of environmental well-being.
The results of environmental monitoring, based on public environmental activity, are also not reflected in the Comprehensive System of Statistical Indicators of Environmental Protection in the Russian Federation.
According to sociological surveys, in the modern period, less than 15% of the Russian population are concerned about environmental degradation, and according to averaged data for 1998-2020, the proportion of people who are concerned has halved.At the same time, about 90% of the Russian population do not see any improvement in environmental issues; more than half of Russians assess the environmental situation negatively.In other words, the share of negative information in the media is decreasing, but the share of appeals to the state authorities is increasing (for example, in 2020 the prosecutor's office revealed more than 282000 violations of environmental legislation, most of them as a result of checking citizens' appeals), which can be concluded about the crisis in public awareness of environmental problems [9].
The increase in public activity, strange as it may seem, has accompanied important environmental protection transformations aimed at improving environmental security.In 2017 the introduction of new systems of production and consumption waste management began in the Russian regions.The importance of this initiative is hard to dispute: according to the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation, landfill capacity in 17 Russian regions will be exhausted by 2022, and in another 32 by 2024.But more than 90% of waste is accumulated on their territories.According to Rosprirodnadzor, when the National Ecology Project was formed, there were 8323 landfills in the regions, including 916 landfills in urban districts.At the same time, the federal project "Clean Country" envisages the elimination and reclamation of only 191 landfills, i.e. more than 700 of them will continue to be exploited in the future.In this context, social protests took place in 2019-2020, involving more than 36,000 participants in regions such as Moscow, the Moscow region, the Arkhangelsk region, the Komi Republic and St. Petersburg.In most cases, the protests were triggered by the lack of legal assessment of the overconsumption of landfill capacity and the lack of verification of complaints about possible violations of production and consumption waste management rules.Although, for example, in the Moscow Oblast protests resulted in the closure of 24 out of 39 landfills, in the towns near Moscow mass appeals of citizens for medical care in connection with poisoning by fumes from landfills were recorded many times (for example, in late March 2018 such complaints were made by more than 240 residents of Volokolamsk [10], and regional authorities actually admitted criminalization of "rubbish" business [11], the necessary legal assessment was not given to this.The negative sentiments of citizens could not find any other explanation except environmental illiteracy, "swaying" of the situation, "unpatriotism", etc. [12], and proper procedural actions, through which evidence of crimes could have been identified, were not carried out.According to the results of the monitoring of publications in the media we can conclude that the information received from citizens, in more than 90% of cases, contained data on criminal activity in the field of production and consumption waste handling.However, none of the reports resulted in the initiation of criminal proceedings and subsequent investigation. While the two main sources of assessment of the state of environmental protection are the information provided by business entities regarding its conditionally permitted pollution, and the results of field observations selectively carried out by various controlling and law enforcement agencies, it is possible to note their potential incompleteness (the former may be interested in hiding information about the real pollution volumes or, as it was seen in the "Norilsk Nickel case", not provide it at all, the latter may be interested in hiding the real pollution volumes or, as it was seen in the "Norilsk Nickel case".Public outcry may lead to subsequent legal reviews of environmental emergencies.For example, in February 2021 the Arbitration Court of Krasnoyarsk Region ordered Norilsk-Taimyr Energy Company (NTEC) to compensate for damage to the environment caused by the accident at Heat Power Station 3 in Norilsk in May, 2020, in the total amount of 146,177 billion rubles.Criminal cases have been instituted against some officials of CHPP under Art.246, 250, 254 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, two of them were arrested.However, restoration of the ecological balance in the disaster zone will take about ten years, and during this period the state will allocate substantial budgetary funds for this purpose.This is a collateral consequence of the irreparable damage potentially caused by the negative impact on the environment, which destroys the ecological security of society and the state.

Assessment of the law enforcement and judicial system's effectiveness in protecting the environmental interests of society
A reliable assessment of the effectiveness of law enforcement and the judiciary in protecting the environmental interests of society requires the development and subsequent implementation of a multidimensional strategy based on integrated processing of data on negative environmental impacts from governmental and independent sources.Financial support for the implementation of the National Ecology Project involves the allocation of over RUB 4.1 trillion from 2019 to 2024, while the Accounts Chamber of the Russian Federation has recorded no information on the actual achievement of 29% of indicators and no dynamics for more than one third of the indicators.Under these circumstances, a change in the principles for recording and estimating data on the number of environmental offences and crimes is justified.
Targeted programmes to prevent the spread of mass non-communicable diseases occupy an important place in the structure of management decisions and subsequent law enforcement activity.Thus, in 2019, the level of estimated actual prevented damage to public health was about 312.8 billion roubles, exceeding the 2018 value by more than 7.3%.The projected value for 2019 was 2.2% higher than the actual value.The estimated level of prevented economic damage from mortality, morbidity and disability as a result of actions and measures for health risk management applied by Rospotrebnadzor in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation reflects its increase by 2024 by more than 2 times against 2017, which is about RUB 369.0bn annually.
The above data characterize the activities of regulatory bodies and economic entities as quite effective and confirm their interest in maintaining environmental well-being.Nevertheless, every year in Russia, environmental disasters of various proportions occur, whose genesis is a predatory attitude towards nature, the gross negligence of users of natural resources, or the poor performance of public authorities in terms of prevention of such situations.For example, in 2020 Russia will witness two environmental disasters (a fuel spill at a Norilsk nickel plant and a mass extinction of marine fauna in the Kamchatka region) and a number of smaller-scale disasters (coal dust and smog pollution in the Krasnoyarsk and Chelyabinsk Regions, and the Kemerovo Region).In 2021 the focus of public attention was the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) where wildfires spread, destroying vegetation and threatening the life, health and property of the citizens (as of early July 2021 According to the Russian EMERCOM, in 2020 the main types of emergencies were man-made, natural and bio-social.Man-made emergencies accounted for 50.5% of the total number of emergencies, while natural emergencies accounted for 31.4% and biological and social emergencies for 18.1%.The total material damage from ES in 2020 amounted to 163 778,093 mln rubles of which: technogenic ES -151 116,791 mln rubles (92,3%); natural ES -12 389,434 mln rubles (7,6%); bio-social ES -271,868 mln rubles (0,2%).However it is difficult to estimate potential long-term damage (delayed damage caused by the consequences of emergencies).
In this connection, it becomes necessary to use legal instruments to ensure compensation for damage caused to natural objects, life and health of citizens.
Depending on whether damage to the environment is caused under legal or illegal use of natural resources, what parameters it has and what its consequences can be eliminated and which are unrecoverable, legal protection is covered by the framework of chargeable natural resource use, administrative or criminal liability.A well-developed system of law enforcement and supervisory bodies should ideally maintain a protected state of society's environmental interests.

Qualitative analysis of legislation protecting the environmental interests of society
In the system of sources of legislation to ensure the proper protection of the environmental interests of society, the constitutional and legal norms enshrined directly in the Basic Law and in the regulations of various levels of legislation that develop it take precedence.According to the results of some studies, it can be concluded that this approach is an established standard in modern times and is used in many countries.Already in 2010 in 142 of the 198 states of the world the acts of constitutional value contained a reference to the environmental rights, and in 125 such norms had a fundamental significance [13], and the kind of juridical technique used was recognized as socially useful [14].
Thus, the Preamble to the Constitution of the Russian Federation contains the principle of responsibility to future generations; it proclaims the need to ensure the welfare and prosperity of the inhabitants of the country.By virtue of article 7 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation Russia is a social state, in which the activities of public authorities are focused on maintaining the welfare of the population.However, it follows from Article 7 (1) of the Russian Constitution that State policy is directed towards the creation of conditions that ensure a decent life and the free development of the individual.This provision is fully consistent with the international legal tradition according to which it is impossible to realize human rights separately from the state's provision for ecological wellbeing.The essence of the social state is interpreted in the legal doctrine rather narrowly, based on the recognition of the importance of developing legal instruments that guarantee the implementation of labor, pension and other social rights of citizens [15].However, in the context of the obligation of the state to create conditions for a decent life of the population, environmental protection measures, environmental improvement, control over the activities of economic entities that can cause damage to natural components, quite logically appear to be an integral part of social policy.Moreover, as in many countries around the world, the environmental agenda in Russia serves as a means of social consolidation.constitutional value.It is not absolutised by the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation (it recognises only the universality of duties in terms of nature protection, e.g. in Ruling No. 5-P of 5 March 2013), so scientific views on its absolute nature [16] seem to be disputable.For example, the informational component may be narrowed in connection with the implementation of state decisions aimed at increasing the state defense capability; uniform qualitative parameters of the environment are actually an ideal construction; the presumption of damage compensation in the constitutional norm is not disclosed by means of specific binding norms.It is quite interesting to recognize article 42 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation as a normative model that characterizes the modern features of ensuring the environmental well-being of people in the context of globalization [17].Developing this thesis we can pay attention to the following.
Art. 7, 42, 58 and 75.1 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation can be considered as the constructive parameters determining the configuration of the protection of the ecological interests of the society.To a certain extent they are reflected in federal laws and some strategic documents.Between 1999 and 2021 the constitutional review body referred to the provisions of the Russian Constitution that supported the protection of the public's environmental interests 34 times, but in more than 90% of cases it did not address the merits of constitutional claims, refusing to accept them for consideration.
Article 114 of the Russian Constitution holds a special place among the constitutional provisions protecting environmental interests of society.It obliges the Russian government to take measures for the conservation of natural wealth and biodiversity.This duty is organically linked to Article 9 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which recognises natural resources as the basis of human life and activity.P. e5 of Part 1 of Article 114 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation is a regulatory prerequisite for establishing a system of state bodies responsible for controlling activities of economic entities which may have a negative impact on the environment.
Of the provisions of federal legislation, it is relevant to mention Federal Law No. 52-FZ of 30 March 1999 "On Sanitary and Epidemiological Welfare of the Population".Its regulatory role increased significantly during the Covid-19 pandemic and it can be perceived as an additional instrument detailing constitutional provisions (including Articles 42, 58 of the Russian Constitution).
Among the strategic acts, it is logical to cite as an example the Environmental Security Strategy of the Russian Federation for the period until 2025, approved by Presidential Decree No 176 of 19 April 2017, which states that up to 15% of the state's territory is characterised by environmental disadvantage, and proposes a number of solutions to this problem at municipal, regional and federal levels.Challenges and threats to environmental security can have different origins (be a consequence of a man-made disaster or unfriendly activities of foreign states, arise in connection with the accidental coincidence of circumstances, have a natural origin).The strategy sets an important task of liquidation of accumulated environmental damage, which can also be considered as an additional guarantee of implementation of the constitutional right, stipulated by Article 42 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
Summing up the intermediate result, we can conclude that constitutional-legal prescriptions and normative-legal acts developing them are balanced between each other and create conditions for imposing various kinds of responsibility on persons who have committed environmental offences and crimes.
The next set of normative sources is united within the branch of environmental legislation.In Russia it was isolated only in the post-Soviet period; at the same time the scientific discussion about the place of environmental law in the national legal system ended with the statement of its independent dominant role in the legal regulation of social relations associated with the use of natural resources [18].Environmental legislation establishes a general list of harmful actions of physical and legal persons, as a result of which may be caused damage to the environment.This list can be adapted to different types of liability, which depends on the amount of damage caused and the scale of costs to eliminate its consequences.Article 77 of the Federal Law "On environmental protection" contains a presumption of full compensation for damage to the environment, establishing a corresponding obligation.The sources from which compensation may be made do not include state expenditures; however, in fact, financing of restoration of the protected state of the environment from the federal budget is necessary, as compensation from the property of the person causing the damage may not be sufficient.
The structure of socially unacceptable activities causing damage to components of nature is reflected in Article 77 of the Federal Law "On Environmental Protection" as follows: -pollution; -depletion;; -deterioration; -use of natural resources; -degradation and destruction of natural ecological systems, natural complexes and natural landscapes; -other violations of environmental legislation.
The given list has a serious defect: most of the terms have a similar meaning, which makes it difficult to impose legal liability on the offender.
To the maximum extent the incompleteness in disclosure of legal characteristics of environmental offences is compensated by the legal positions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, which addressed environmental problems more than 50 times and formulated about 150 explanations, used by law enforcers in qualification of environmental offences and crimes.This situation was made possible by the considerable complexity of environmental legislation and its complex nature.The legal positions of courts are not a source of law in Russia, but serve as a certain standard used in qualifying crimes and other offences.At the same time, when interpreting legal provisions, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation resorts to an open list approach, i.e. cites specific situations forming the objective side of a deed, but leaves it to the discretion of law enforcers the cases similar in a number of features to those given in the list (for example, the category of other grave consequences in the crime provided for by Article 246 of the Criminal Code is revealed in paragraph 5 of the Plenum Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of October 18, 2012 № 21).
The provisions of the legislation on administrative offences are effective tools to maintain the protection of environmental interests of society.Scientists rightly argue that in Russia unlawful encroachments on public relations in the field of environmental protection and nature management in most cases are recognized as administrative offences [19].Administrative offences encroaching on the established order of nature management and environmental interests of society constitute a significant array of illegal acts committed in the implementation of economic and other anthropogenic activities.
In total, the CAO RF contains a description of more than one hundred administrative offences involving violations of the rules of nature management or environmental protection.Turning to Chapter 8 of the CAO RF as the foundation on which the administrative-legal protection of environmental interests of society is based, it can be noted that it includes 61 independent articles, many of which include the legal characteristics of compositions of several offences, united by the similarity of the infringement object.The list of administratively punishable environmental offences is quite broad: in addition to Chapter 8 of the CAO RF, some related compositions are also found in its other chapters (for example, articles.7.3, 7.6 of the CAO RF -offences in the field of  19.4, 19.4.1 of the CAO RF -offences against the order of administration).It appears that in such cases, public relations in the field of nature management serve as an additional object of administrative offence.The presence of a significant number of administrative-legal prohibitions provides a protected state of environmental interests of society.In many cases, administrative practice becomes a criterion for subsequent approbation of criminal-law norms that establish responsibility for environmental crimes.
There is an intrinsic relation between the norms of administrative and criminal law, by virtue of which criminal liability may arise when the public danger of an act increases.It is also important that fines levied administratively on legal entities for committing environmental offences and fines established as the main punishment for environmental crimes are significantly different.For example, Article 8.2 of the CAO RF and Article 247 of the RF Criminal Code have similarities in the description of the prohibited act (violation of the rules for handling production and consumption waste).For comparison, the fine established by part 1 of Article 247 of the Criminal Code of the RF as the main punishment is 200 thousand rubles.The maximum similar to this norm of part. 3 of Article 8.2 of the CAO RF provides for a fine in respect of a legal entity in the amount of up to 500 thousand roubles.
Socially dangerous encroachments on ecological interests of the society are dispersed in several sections of the criminal law, have a complex structure and specificity of types, conditioned by the variety of forms of nature management, which require criminal law protection.
First of all, it is necessary to highlight the criminal law prohibitions contained in Chapter 26 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which characterize the majority of socially dangerous encroachments committed while carrying out legal or illegal use of natural resources.In addition, criminal legislation establishes liability for ecocide (a particularly dangerous crime against the peace and security of mankind).The order of legal regulation of criminal liability in terms of its differentiation according to the generic object underwent some changes in 2014, when Article 191.1 was added to the criminal law, which criminalised illegal trafficking in timber.This was an important legislative decision, since the environmental crime of "illegal logging" does not fully characterize illegal forest management [20].Concerning the combined application of these norms we have obtained interesting criminological data (including those that have established coinciding territorial dynamics of the prevalence of crimes under articles.191.1, 260 of the Criminal Code of the RF [21]).Illegal timber trafficking refers to crimes in the sphere of economic activity, encroaches on the normal order of forest management, which constitutes a significant part of the budget system revenues (49% of the territory of Russia is covered with forests, commercial forest management is quite demanded as a type of business activity).At the same time illegal exploitation of forests creates a threat to the environment (valuable species of wood are cut down, technologies are used that are known to cause damage, neighbouring areas are damaged, and to conceal traces of crime the cut areas may be set on fire).In addition, competitive relations are violated, the interests of legal forest users are harmed, and the budget system receives less tax revenue.
Environmental interests of the society are criminally protected in three chapters of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, characterizing different generic and species objects.This approach seems fair, but requires some expansion and justification of the system of environmental crimes, many of which are beyond the provisions of the Chapter 26 of the Criminal Code.

Conclusions
The ecological situation is always an object of heightened public interest, so detailed information about its condition should be an essential part of the activities of authorities at all levels.Departing from this requirement violates the ecological interests of society.
A multifaceted legal mechanism is therefore a justified step in order to keep the public's ecological interests protected.This mechanism has a mixed legal nature and includes environmental-legal, administrative-legal, and criminal-legal instruments.Their effective combination guarantees the environmental welfare of the population, a relatively stable protected state of the environment from harmful anthropogenic impacts, and the good faith of economic entities in carrying out economic activities.
Legal protection of the environmental interests of society has become complex, on the basis of which the following legal regimes can be distinguished.
-basic, containing the basic rights and obligations characterising the spectrum of environmental interests of society; -standard, describing permitted forms of natural resource use, taking into account restrictions dictated by the potential negative impact of anthropogenic activities on the environment; -administrative-legal, describing consequences of environmental damage in the absence of signs of crime; -criminal and legal, providing liability for committing socially dangerous encroachments in the sphere of nature management; -control and supervisory, reflecting the totality of powers of state bodies and their officials in terms of ensuring compliance with the requirements of current legislation on permissible environmental impact in the implementation of economic and other anthropogenic activities.
The diversity of legal regimes is due to the fact that the environmental interests of society have a complex and complex structure that requires the establishment of extensive legal regulation.

Fig. 1 .
Fig. 1.Total environmental protection expenditures, contribution by sectors of the Russian economy.
and OECD indicators are reflected in the Integrated Framework.The total number of indicators is 84; they are systematised according to 12 items: atmospheric air pollution and ozone layer depletion, climate change, water resources, biodiversity, land resources, agriculture, energy, transport, waste, natural disasters and catastrophes, environmental offences, environmental funding.However, records of the number of environmental offences are not fully organised in the Integrated E3S Web of Conferences 381, 02044 (2023) https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202338102044AQUACULTURE 2022 more than 300 blazes with uncontrollable spread; in August 2021 smoke from fires reached not only some Siberian cities, but also the Arctic region).