Actuality. Despite a nearly century-old history of erosion damage assessments, this issue has not yet been finally resolved. If the economic component of losses can be relatively easily calculated, then environmental and socio-environmental damage are almost impossible to calculate.
Purpose. To show the possibilities and limitations of using individual indicators for assessment of damage and the environmental and economic justification of anti-erosion measures based on analysis of the environmental, economic and social consequences of soil erosion, and world experience in assessing damage from erosion.
Results. Losses from erosion today are most often estimated by the mass of washed soil (t / ha), the cost of restoring lost nutrients and organic matter, as well as the cost of agricultural products lost due to reduced yields on eroded soils and stop cultivation of hard eroded soils. Soil losses are usually estimated by mathematical
modeling. Different approaches to the assessment of losses give a ten-fold difference in the estimates, which reduces the credibility of them when making decisions. Land users are not interested in investing in anti-erosion measures more than the cost of the crop, which they can additionally receive. In Ukraine, this leads to a de facto neglect of the problem of erosion, which, developing on the principle of positive feedback, leads to the deepening of socio-economic problems and the deterioration of the country's food security
Conclusions. To justify anti-erosion measures at the level of land users, the only reliable source for quantifying the potential damage from erosion is the shortage of agricultural products and the loss of soil organic matter and fertilizers. The real damage from erosion lies in the plane of global environmental processes and food security, therefore, the problem of erosion should be addressed at the national level.
Ecological Restoration Modes of Soil and Water Conservation on the Mining Wasteland in Northern Grassland