banner



Home  ›  How To Find Ecological Footprint

How To Find Ecological Footprint

Written By Monday, February 28, 2022 Add Comment Edit

The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Globe's ecosystems. Information technology is a standardized mensurate of demand for natural majuscule that may be assorted with the planet's ecological chapters to regenerate. [1] It represents the amount of biologically productive country and sea area necessary to supply the resources a human population consumes, and to mitigate associated waste. Using this assessment, it is possible to estimate how much of the Earth (or how many planet Earths) it would take to support humanity if everybody followed a given lifestyle. For 2006, humanity's total ecological footprint was estimated at 1.4 planet Earths – in other words, humanity uses ecological services 1.4 times as fast as Globe tin renew them. [two] Every twelvemonth, this number is recalculated — with a three year lag due to the time it takes for the United nations to collect and publish all the underlying statistics.

While the term ecological footprint is widely used, [three] methods of calculation vary. Even so, standards are at present emerging to make results more comparable and consistent. [four]

Contents

  • i Analysis
    • 1.i Overview
    • one.2 Methodology
  • 2 Studies in the United Kingdom
  • 3 Give-and-take
  • 4 Past state
  • 5 See too
  • 6 References
  • vii Further reading
  • 8 External links

Analysis

Overview

The beginning academic publication near the ecological footprint was by William Rees in 1992. [5] The ecological footprint concept and calculation method was developed as the PhD dissertation of Mathis Wackernagel, under Rees' supervision at the Academy of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, from 1990–1994. [six] Originally, Wackernagel and Rees called the concept "appropriated carrying capacity". [7] To make the idea more than attainable, Rees came up with the term "ecological footprint," inspired past a computer technician who praised his new figurer's "modest footprint on the desk-bound." [8] In early 1996, Wackernagel and Rees published the book Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. [nine]

Ecological footprint analysis compares human demand on nature with the biosphere's ability to regenerate resources and provide services. It does this past assessing the biologically productive country and marine area required to produce the resource a population consumes and absorb the respective waste, using prevailing engineering. Footprint values at the cease of a survey are categorized for Carbon, Nutrient, Housing, and Goods and Services equally well as the full footprint number of Earths needed to sustain the world's population at that level of consumption. This arroyo can also be applied to an activity such as the manufacturing of a production or driving of a car. This resource accounting is similar to life cycle assay wherein the consumption of free energy, biomass (nutrient, fiber), building material, water and other resource are converted into a normalized measure of state area called 'global hectares' (gha).

Per capita ecological footprint (EF) is a means of comparison consumption and lifestyles, and checking this against nature's ability to provide for this consumption. The tool tin inform policy by examining to what extent a nation uses more (or less) than is available within its territory, or to what extent the nation'south lifestyle would be replicable worldwide. The footprint tin can besides be a useful tool to educate people virtually carrying chapters and over-consumption, with the aim of altering personal beliefs. Ecological footprints may be used to fence that many current lifestyles are not sustainable. Such a global comparison also conspicuously shows the inequalities of resources employ on this planet at the offset of the 20-first century.

In 2006, the boilerplate biologically productive area per person worldwide was approximately 1.8 global hectares (gha) per capita. The U.South. footprint per capita was 9.0 gha, and that of Switzerland was five.6 gha per person, while China'southward was 1.viii gha per person. [ten] [11] The WWF claims that the human footprint has exceeded the biocapacity (the available supply of natural resources) of the planet past 20%. [12] Wackernagel and Rees originally estimated that the available biological chapters for the 6 billion people on Globe at that time was about ane.3 hectares per person, which is smaller than the 1.8 global hectares published for 2006, because the initial studies neither used global hectares nor included bioproductive marine areas. [9]

A number of NGO websites allow interpretation of one's ecological footprint (come across Footprint Computer, beneath).

Ecological footprint analysis is now widely used around the globe every bit an indicator of environmental sustainability.[ citation needed ] Information technology tin be used to measure and manage the utilise of resources throughout the economic system. Information technology can be used to explore the sustainability of individual lifestyles, goods and services, organizations, industry sectors, neighborhoods, cities, regions and nations. [thirteen] Since 2006, a first prepare of ecological footprint standards exist that detail both communication and calculation procedures. They are available at world wide web.footprintstandards.org and were developed in a public procedure facilitated by Global Footprint Network and its partner organizations.

Methodology

The ecological footprint bookkeeping method at the national level is described in the Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010 [xiv] or in more detail in the Calculation Methodology for the National Footprint Accounts [15] . The National Accounts Review Committee has also published a inquiry agenda on how the method will be improved. [xvi]

There have been differences in the methodology used by diverse ecological footprint studies. Examples include how sea area should be counted, how to account for fossil fuels, how to account for nuclear power (many studies[ weasel words ] simply consider it to have the same ecological footprint equally fossil fuels),[ citation needed ] which information sources used, when boilerplate global numbers or local numbers should be used when looking at a specific area, how space for biodiversity should be included, and how imports/exports should exist accounted for.[half dozen].[7] Even so, with the new footprint standards, the methods are converging.[ citation needed ]

In 2003, Jason Venetoulis, PhD, Carl Mas, Christopher Gudoet, Dahlia Chazan, and John Talberth -a team of researchers at Redefining- adult Footprint ii.0. Footprint 2.0 offers a serial of theoretical and methodological improvements to the standard footprint approach. The primary advancements were to include the entire surface of the Earth in biocapacity estimates, allocate space for other (not-human being) species, change the basis of equivalence factors from agronomical land to net primary productivity (NPP), and modify the carbon component of the footprint, based on global carbon models. The advancements were peer reviewed and published in several books, and have been well received by teachers, researchers, and advocacy organizations concerned nearly the ecological implications of humanity'due south footprint. [17] [xviii] liar

Studies in the United Kingdom

The United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland's average ecological footprint is 5.45 global hectares per capita (gha) with variations between regions ranging from 4.80 gha (Wales) to 5.56 gha (East England). [11] Ii recent studies take examined relatively low-impact minor communities. BedZED, a 96-home mixed-income housing development in South London, was designed past Bill Dunster Architects and sustainability consultants BioRegional for the Peabody Trust. Despite being populated by relatively "mainstream" home-buyers, BedZED was institute to have a footprint of 3.20 gha due to on-site renewable energy production, energy-efficient architecture, and an all-encompassing green lifestyles plan that included on-site London's start carsharing club. The study did non measure the added footprint of the xv,000 visitors who have toured BedZED since its completion in 2002. Findhorn Ecovillage, a rural intentional customs in Moray, Scotland, had a total footprint of ii.56 gha, including both the many guests and visitors who travel to the community to undertake residential courses there and the nearby campus of Cluny Hill College. However, the residents alone have a footprint of 2.71 gha, a little over half the UK national average and one of the lowest ecological footprints of whatsoever community measured and so far in the industrialized world [xix] [xx] Keveral Farm, an organic farming community in Cornwall, was found to have a footprint of 2.4 gha, though with substantial differences in footprints amid community members. [21]

Discussion

Early criticism was published by van den Bergh and Verbruggen in 1999; [22] another criticism was published in 2008. [23] A more than complete review deputed by the Directorate-General for the Environment (European Commission) and published in June 2008 provides the most updated independent assessment of the method. [24] A number of countries have engaged in inquiry collaborations to test the validity of the method. This includes Switzerland, Germany, United Arab Emirates, and Belgium. [25]

Grazi et al. (2007) have performed a systematic comparison of the ecological footprint method with spatial welfare analysis that includes ecology externalities, agglomeration effects and merchandise advantages. [26] They find that the ii methods can lead to very singled-out, and even opposite, rankings of unlike spatial patterns of economic activity. Nevertheless, this should not be surprising, since the two methods address different research questions.

Computing the ecological footprint for densely populated areas, such as a city or minor country with a comparatively big population — east.m. New York and Singapore respectively — may pb to the perception of these populations as "parasitic". This is considering these communities have petty intrinsic biocapacity, and instead must rely upon big hinterlands. Critics argue that this is a dubious label since mechanized rural farmers in developed nations may hands consume more than resources than urban inhabitants, due to transportation requirements and the unavailability of economies of scale. Furthermore, such moral conclusions seem to be an argument for autarky. Some even take this railroad train of thought a step farther, challenge that the Footprint denies the benefits of trade. Therefore, the critics argue that the Footprint tin simply exist applied globally. [27]

The method seems to reward the replacement of original ecosystems with high-productivity agronomical monocultures by assigning a higher biocapacity to such regions. For instance, replacing ancient woodlands or tropical forests with monoculture forests or plantations may meliorate the ecological footprint. Similarly, if organic farming yields were lower than those of conventional methods, this could result in the former existence "penalized" with a larger ecological footprint. [28] Of course, this insight, while valid, stems from the idea of using the footprint as ane'south but metric. If the utilize of ecological footprints are complemented with other indicators, such as one for biodiversity, the trouble could maybe be solved. Indeed, WWF's Living Planet Report complements the biennial Footprint calculations with the Living Planet Index of biodiversity. [29] Manfred Lenzen and Shauna Murray have created a modified Ecological Footprint that takes biodiversity into account for use in Commonwealth of australia. [30]

Although the ecological footprint model prior to 2008 treated nuclear power in the same fashion equally coal power, [31] the actual real world effects of the two are radically unlike. A life cycle analysis centered on the Swedish Forsmark Nuclear Ability Constitute estimated carbon dioxide emissions at 3.x chiliad/kWh [32] and 5.05 chiliad/kWh in 2002 for the Torness Nuclear Ability Station. [33] This compares to 11 thou/kWh for hydroelectric ability, 950 one thousand/kWh for installed coal, 900 1000/kWh for oil and 600 1000/kWh for natural gas generation in the United States in 1999. [34] Figures released by Mark Hertsgaard, however, bear witness that considering of the delays in building nuclear plants and the costs involved, investments in energy efficiency and renewable energies have seven times the return on investment of investments in nuclear energy. [35]

The Vattenfall study found Nuclear, Hydro, and Wind to have far less greenhouse emissions than other sources represented.

The Swedish utility Vattenfall did a study of full life bicycle emissions of Nuclear, Hydro, Coal, Gas, Solar Cell, Peat and Wind which the utility uses to produce electricity. The net issue of the study was that nuclear power produced iii.3 grams of carbon dioxide per KW-Hr of produced power. This compares to 400 for natural gas and 700 for coal (according to this written report). The written report also concluded that nuclear power produced the smallest corporeality of COtwo of any of their electricity sources. [36]

Claims exist that the issues of nuclear waste practise not come anywhere close to budgeted the problems of fossil fuel waste. [37] [38] A 2004 article from the BBC states: "The Globe Health Organization (WHO) says 3 million people are killed worldwide past outdoor air pollution annually from vehicles and industrial emissions, and 1.vi million indoors through using solid fuel." [39] In the U.S. alone, fossil fuel waste kills 20,000 people each year. [40] A coal power plant releases 100 times as much radiations as a nuclear power plant of the same wattage. [41] It is estimated that during 1982, US coal burning released 155 times as much radioactivity into the atmosphere equally the Three Mile Island incident. [42] In addition, fossil fuel waste matter causes global warming, which leads to increased deaths from hurricanes, flooding, and other weather events. The Globe Nuclear Association provides a comparison of deaths due to accidents among different forms of energy product. In their comparing, deaths per TW-yr of electricity produced (in UK and United states) from 1970 to 1992 are quoted as 885 for hydropower, 342 for coal, 85 for natural gas, and 8 for nuclear. [43]

Past country

Master article: List of countries by ecological footprint

The world-boilerplate ecological footprint in 2007 was ii.7 global hectares per person (18.0 billion in total). With a world-average biocapacity of 1.8 global hectares per person (12 billion in total), this leads to an ecological deficit of 0.nine global hectares per person (6 billion in total).

See as well

  • Carbon footprint
  • Water footprint
  • Dependency theory
  • Ecological economics
  • Ecosystem valuation
  • Ecology impact assessment
  • Greenhouse debt
  • Life cycle assessment
  • Limits to Growth
  • Netherlands fallacy
  • Physical balance of trade
  • Simon–Ehrlich wager
  • The Population Bomb
  • List of environmental issues

References

  1. ^ "Ewing et al. 2001". Global Footprint Network. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/National_Footprint_Accounts_Method_Paper_2010.pdf . Retrieved 25 February 2001.
  2. ^ "Data Sources". Global Footprint Network. 2010-02-05. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/alphabetize.php/GFN/page/data_sources/ . Retrieved 2060-02-05.
  3. ^ United nations Environment Programme UNEP reports. [1]
  4. ^ http://www.footprintstandards.org
  5. ^ Rees, William East. (Oct 1992). "Ecological footprints and appropriated conveying capacity: what urban economic science leaves out". Environment and Urbanisation 4 (2): 121–130. doi:10.1177/095624789200400212.
  6. ^ Wackernagel, M. (1994) (PDF). Ecological Footprint and Appropriated Carrying Capacity: A Tool for Planning Toward Sustainability (PhD thesis). Vancouver, Canada: School of Community and Regional Planning. The University of British Columbia. OCLC 41839429. https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/7132/ubc_1994-954027.pdf?sequence=1.
  7. ^ Wackernagel, Mathis, 1991. "Land Utilize: Measuring a Community's Appropriated Conveying Chapters as an Indicator for Sustainability;" and "Using Appropriated Carrying Capacity as an Indicator, Measuring the Sustainability of a Community." Report I & II to the UBC Job Forcefulness on Salubrious and Sustainable Communities, Vancouver.
  8. ^ William Safire, On Language: Footprint, New York Times Magazine, February 17, 2008
  9. ^ a b Wackernagel, Mathis & Rees, William (1996)"Our Ecological Footprint" (New Society Printing)
  10. ^ [2] or [3] Living Planet Written report 2008 outlines scenarios for humanity'southward hereafter. Global Footprint Network. Retrieved: 2009-02-15
  11. ^ a b Chambers, North. et al. (2004) Scotland's Footprint. Best Foot Frontwards. ISBN 0-9546042-0-2.
  12. ^ Global ecosystems 'face collapse' BBC News. Retrieved: 2007-05-18.
  13. ^ Global Footprint Network "Ecological Footprint: Overview." Retrieved on August one, 2007.
  14. ^ "Ewing et al. 2010". Global Footprint Network. http://world wide web.footprintnetwork.org/en/alphabetize.php/GFN/page/ecological_footprint_atlas_2010 . Retrieved 21 January 2011.
  15. ^ "Ewing et al. 2010". Global Footprint Network. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/images/uploads/National_Footprint_Accounts_Method_Paper_2010.pdf . Retrieved xiii June 2011.
  16. ^ A Inquiry Agenda for Improving National Ecological Footprint Accounts Retrieved: 2007-11-11 [dead link]
  17. ^ Globe in Motion: The Globalization and the Environment Reader, Venetoulis and Talberth (2009), edited by Gary Kroll and Richard Howard Robbins
  18. ^ "Redefining the Footprint (footprint ii.0)" in Sustainable Development: Principles, Frameworks, and Example Studies, CRC, Routledge (2010).
  19. ^ Findhorn eco-footprint is 'world's smallest' Sunday Herald, August eleven, 2008."A new expert study says the multinational community'southward ecological footprint is half the United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland average. This means Findhorn uses 50% fewer resources and creates fifty% less waste matter than normal."
  20. ^ Tinsley, Due south. and George, H. (2006) Ecological Footprint of the Findhorn Foundation and Community. Moray. Sustainable Development Research Centre, UHI Millennium Found.
  21. ^ Radical Routes (2006) How to work out your Ecological Footprint. Leeds. Radical Routes Ltd. Available to order or download on the Radical Routes web site
  22. ^ J.C.J.M. van den Bergh and H. Verbruggen (1999). "Spatial sustainability, merchandise and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'" (PDF). Ecological Economics 29 (1): 63–74. http://www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/98105.pdf. [4][5]
  23. ^ Fiala, N. (2008). "Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad ecology science". Ecological Economics 67 (4): 519–525. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.07.023. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/call up/pii/S0921800908003376.
  24. ^ Analysis of the potential of the Ecological Footprint and related assessment tools for use in the Eu'south Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/natres/studies.htm
  25. ^ http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/national_reviews. More specifically, reviews by nations include Switzerland – http://www.bfs.admin.ch/bfs/portal/en/index/themen/21/03/blank/blank/01.html (technical and descriptive report). Eurostat – http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-AU-06-001/EN/KS-AU-06-001-EN.PDF Deutschland – http://world wide web.umweltdaten.de/publikationen/fpdf-l/3489.pdf Ireland – http://erc.epa.ie/safer/iso19115/displayISO19115.jsp?isoID=56#files DG Environment – June 2008: "Potential of the Ecological Footprint for monitoring environmental impact from natural resources use" available at http://ec.europa.european union/environment/natres/studies.htm United Arab Emirates – Al Basama Al Beeiya Initiative http://world wide web.agedi.ae/ecofootprintuae/default.aspx
  26. ^ F. Grazi, J.C.J.One thousand. van den Bergh and P. Rietveld (2007). "Welfare economics versus ecological footprint: modeling agglomeration, externalities and trade". Environmental and Resource Economics 38 (ane): 135–153. doi:x.1007/s10640-006-9067-2.
  27. ^ Planning and Markets: Peter Gordon and Harry W. Richardson
  28. ^ Lenzen, M., C. Borgstrom Hansson and S. Bond (2006) On the bioproductivity and land-disturbance metrics of the Ecological Footprint. University of Sydney, ISA Inquiry Newspaper, June, 06, in collaboration with WWF. Retrieved: 2007-06-04.
  29. ^ Loh, J., R. Dark-green, T. Ricketts, J. Lamoreux, M. Jenkins, Five. Kapos and J. Randers (2005). "The Living Planet Index: using species population time series to track trends in biodiversity" (PDF). Philosophical Transactions of the Regal Gild 360 (1454): 289–295. doi:10.1098/rstb.2004.1584. PMC 1569448. PMID 15814346. http://world wide web.journals.royalsoc.air-conditioning.uk/content/w7vhc82hykd03gly/fulltext.pdf.
  30. ^ Lenzen, Manfred & Murray Shauna A. (2001). "A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia". Ecological Economics 37 (2): 229–255. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00275-v.
  31. ^ Questions and Answers, Global Footprint Network
  32. ^ Vattenfall 2004, Forsmark EPD for 2002 and SwedPower LCA data 2005.
  33. ^ Free energy Analysis of Power Systems accessed twenty October 2007
  34. ^ Electric Power Industry COtwo Emissions accessed 20 October 2007
  35. ^ Hertsgaard, Mark (2011) "Hot: Living Through the Side by side Fifty Years on World" (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt)
  36. ^ nuclearinfo.cyberspace. Greenhouse Emissions of Nuclear Power
  37. ^ David Bodansky (June 2001). "The Environmental Paradox of Nuclear Power". Environmental Exercise iii (ii): 86–eight. doi:x.1017/S1466046600002234. http://units.aps.org/units/fps/free energy/bodansky.cfm. "(reprinted by the American Concrete Society)"
  38. ^ "Some Amazing Facts about Nuclear Power". Baronial 2002. http://russp.org/nucfacts.html . Retrieved 2008-01-31.
  39. ^ Alex Kirby (13 December 2004,). "Pollution: A life and decease issue". BBC News . http://news.bbc.co.united kingdom/1/hi/sci/tech/4086809.stm . Retrieved 2008-01-31.
  40. ^ Don Hopey (June 29, 2005). "State sues utility for U.Due south. pollution violations". Pittsburgh Post-Gazette . http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05180/529969.stm . Retrieved 2008-01-31.
  41. ^ Alex Gabbard. "Coal Combustion: Nuclear Resource or Danger". Oak Ridge National Laboratory. http://world wide web.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html . Retrieved 2008-01-31.
  42. ^ Nuclear proliferation through coal burning — Gordon J. Aubrecht, 2, Ohio State University
  43. ^ "Prophylactic of Nuclear Power Reactors". http://world wide web.world-nuclear.org/info/inf06.html.

Further reading

  • Rees, Due west. Due east. (Oct 1992). "Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out". Surround and Urbanisation 4 (ii): 121. doi:x.1177/095624789200400212. http://eau.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/4/2/121.
  • Rees, W. E. and 1000. Wackernagel (1994) Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: Measuring the natural uppercase requirements of the human economy, in Jansson, A. et al.. Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological Economics Approach to Sustainability. Washington D.C.:Island Printing. ISBN one-55963-316-6
  • Wackernagel, M. (1994) (PDF). Ecological Footprint and Appropriated Conveying Capacity: A Tool for Planning Toward Sustainability (PhD thesis). Vancouver, Canada: School of Community and Regional Planning. The University of British Columbia. OCLC 41839429. https://circle.ubc.ca/bitstream/handle/2429/7132/ubc_1994-954027.pdf?sequence=1.
  • Wackernagel, Yard. and West. Rees. 1996. Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers. ISBN 0-86571-312-X.
  • Wackernagel, M; Schulz, NB; Deumling, D; Linares, AC; Jenkins, Grand; Kapos, Five; Monfreda, C; Loh, J et al. (2002). "Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human being economic system" (PDF). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.s.a.A. 99 (14): 9266–71. doi:x.1073/pnas.142033699. PMC 123129. PMID 12089326. http://www.pnas.org/content/99/14/9266.total.pdf.
  • WWF, Global Footprint Network, Zoological Gild of London (2006) Living Planet Report 2006. WWF Gland, Switzerland. (downloadable in 11 languages via http://world wide web.footprintnetwork.org/newsletters/gfn_blast_0610.html)
  • Lenzen, M. and Murray, S. A. 2003. 'The Ecological Footprint – Issues and Trends.' ISA Inquiry Paper 01-03
  • Chambers, N., Simmons, C. and Wackernagel, 1000. (2000), Sharing Nature's Interest: Ecological Footprints as an Indicator of Sustainability. Earthscan, London ISBN 1-85383-739-3 (meet also http://world wide web.ecologicalfootprint.com)
  • J.C.J.Thou. van den Bergh and H. Verbruggen (1999). "Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'" (PDF). Ecological Economics 29 (1): 63–74. http://www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/98105.pdf.
  • F. Grazi, J.C.J.G. van den Bergh and P. Rietveld (2007). "Welfare economics versus ecological footprint: modeling agglomeration, externalities and merchandise". Ecology and Resource Economic science 38 (1): 135–153. doi:10.1007/s10640-006-9067-2.
  • Ohl, B., Wolf, Due south., & Anderson, West. (2008). "A modest proposal: global rationalization of ecological footprint to eliminate ecological debt". Sustainability: Scientific discipline, Practice, & Policy four (1): 5–16. http://ejournal.nbii.org/archives/vol4iss1/0707-016.ohl.html.

External links

  • Global Footprint Network Ecological Footprint : Overview
  • Earth Overshoot Day Day on which humanity starts consuming more than nature tin regenerate in that year.
  • Footprintcalculator.org: an interactive, wink-blithe, Footprint calculator for individuals (now applicative to 15 countries globe-wide)
  • WWF "Living Planet Study", a biannual adding of national and global footprints
  • Answers to common Footprint questions
  • GTZ's conservation and development series "Sustainability Has Many Faces" A Big Foot on a Small Planet? Bookkeeping with the Ecological Footprint – Succeeding in a world with growing resource constraints. Plenty of additional materials are available via http://world wide web.conservation-development.net/Projekte/Nachhaltigkeit/DVD_10_Footprint/files/Links/index-e.html
  • Ecological Fooprint World Encyclopedia – http://world wide web.eoearth.org/
  • Life Cycle Assessment, introduction
  • Independent directory of service providers, databases, tools for LCA/Carbon footprint and related
  • All-time Pes Forwards Ecological Footprint experts
  • Ecological Footprint 2.0
  • Ecological Footprint Cartogram
  • UK clemency specifically dedicated to sustainable development linked to ecological footprinting
  • 2010 Biodiversity Indicators Partnership
  • US Environmental Footprint Factsheet
  • Interview with Neb Rees
5 · d · due east Sustainability
Philosophy and
definition

Environmentalism· Environmental ethics· Rio Announcement on Surround and Development· Ecological modernization· Stewardship· Sustainable development· Human affect on the environment

Population

Nascence control· Family planning· Overpopulation· Population control· Zero population growth

Consumption

Anthropization· Anti-consumerism· Ecological footprint· Ethical consumerism· Overconsumption· Sustainability advertising· Sustainable consumption· Tragedy of the commons

Engineering

Ecology engineering· Advisable technology

Category· Portal· Outline
v · d · eastward Industrial Environmental
Tools

Agent based modeling· Cost-benefit analysis· DPSIR· Ecolabel· Ecological footprint· Environmental affect assessment· Environmental management system· Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment· Total toll bookkeeping· Input-output assay· Integrated chain management· ISO 14000· Life cycle assessment· Life wheel costing· Material catamenia assay·

MET Matrix· Stakeholder assay

Concepts

Cradle to cradle· Dematerialization· Eco-efficiency· Eco-industrial park· Ecological modernization· Efficient energy use· Exergy· Extended producer responsibility· Industrial metabolism· Industrial symbiosis· Pollution prevention· Life cycle cess· Polluter pays principle· PullApart· Precautionary principle· Rebound effect· Waste product bureaucracy· Waste minimisation

Related fields

Cleaner product· Design for Surroundings· Earth systems engineering and management· Ecological economics· Ecological modernization· Environmental economics· Green chemistry· Sustainable development

Examples

EcoPark· Kalundborg Eco-industrial Park· National Industrial Symbiosis Plan

v · d · e Topics on human being population
Major articles

Globe population· Family unit planning· Light-green revolution· Overpopulation· Over-consumption (water crisis)· Reproductive rights· Sustainable evolution

Biological topics

Population biology· Population control (ane-kid policy· Immigration reduction)· Population turn down· Population density (physiological density)· Population growth· Population pyramid· Projections of population growth

Population ecology

Carrying capacity· Ecological footprint· I = P • A • T· Malthusian growth model· World3 model· Food security· World energy consumption· Globe energy resources· Habitat devastation· Optimum population

Literary works

A Minor Proposal· An Essay on the Principle of Population· Operating Transmission for Spaceship Globe· How Much Country Does a Man Demand?· The Limits to Growth· The Population Bomb· The Ultimate Resources· The Skeptical Environmentalist

Lists

About highly populated countries· Metropolitan areas by population

Events and
organizations

International Conference on Population and Evolution· Optimum Population Trust· United Nations Population Fund· World Population Foundation

Related articles

Globe Population Day· "The Twenty-four hours of 5 Billion"· "The 24-hour interval of Six Billion"· "Solar day of Seven Billion"· "Ecological Debt 24-hour interval"· Easter Isle downfall· Classic Maya collapse· Holocene extinction· Fertility and intelligence

v · d · e Elementary living
Practices

Divineness· DIY ethic· Downshifting· Wood gardening· Freeganism· Frugality· Off-the-grid· Permaculture· Plain clothes· Self-sufficiency· Subsistence agriculture· Sustainable living· Thrifting· Veganism
Movements

Back-to-the-country· Car-free· Empathetic Living· Ecological· Environmental· Irksome· War revenue enhancement resistance
Books

Small Is Beautiful· Walden

Related topics

Agrarianism· Anti-consumerism· Appropriate applied science· Degrowth· Ecological footprint· Food miles· Intentional living· Manifestly people

Source: https://en-academic.com/dic.nsf/enwiki/181568

Posted by: prevostnotheires.blogspot.com

0 Response to "How To Find Ecological Footprint"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel