Ecological footprint

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The phrase "ecological footprint" is a metaphor used to depict the amount of land and water area a human population would hypothetically need to provide the resources required to support itself and to absorb its wastes, given prevailing technology. The term was first coined in 1992 by Canadian ecologist and professor at the University of British Columbia, William Rees.

Footprinting is now widely used around the globe as an indicator of environmental sustainability. It can be used to measure and manage the use of resources throughout the economy. It is commonly used to explore the sustainability of individual lifestyles, goods and services, organisations, industry sectors, neighborhoods, cities, regions and nations.

It measures the people's demand on nature and compares human consumption of natural resources with the earth's ecological capacity to regenerate them. Human footprint has exceeded the biocapacity of the planet by 25%.

Contents 1 Ecological footprint analysis 2 Changing consumption patterns 2.1 Population Biology 3 Criticisms 4 Ecological Footprint Studies in the United Kingdom 5 References 6 See also 7 External links 7.1 General 7.2 Calculators

[edit] Ecological footprint analysis

Ecological footprint analysis approximates the amount of ecologically productive land, sea and other water mass area required to sustain a population, manufacture a product, or undertake certain activities, by accounting the use of energy, food, water, building material and other consumables. The calculations used typically convert this into a measure of land area used in 'global hectares' (gha) per person.

It is a way of determining relative consumption for the purpose of educating people about their resource use and, sometimes, triggering them to alter their over-consumption. It can be combined with overpopulation concerns and stated as "the number of Earths it would take to support every human living exactly the way you do." Ecological footprints is used to argue that current lifestyles are not sustainable. For example, the average "earthshare" available to each human citizen is approximately 1.9 gha per capita. The US average footprint is 9.5 gha per capita, and that of Switzerland 4 gha, whilst China's is circa 1.5 gha per head.^[1]

A number of NGO websites allow estimation of one's ecological footprint (see Footprint Calculator, below).

[edit] Changing consumption patterns

It is human use of renewable resources, not of non-renewable ones, at a rate beyond their carrying capacity, that poses the real sustainability crisis.^{[citation needed]} Nature can restore renewable resources at a certain rate. Humans consistently and increasingly consume renewables faster than wilderness and ecosystems can replenish them.

This state of excessive ecological burden eventually threatens those very ecosystems by not allowing them sufficient time to "recharge." Furthermore, humans can clearly live without nonrenewable resources such as metals or fossil fuels, as we have done in the not-so-distant past. It is the renewable resource base on which we and all species depend. The ecological footprint approach can introduce the concept of resource recharge and the rate at which we use resources as key elements in more sustainable human societies. This time element helps us understand that it's not just what we use, or even how much, but how fast, and over what period of time. This meshes with other movements to "slow down" human consumption, choose simple living and help people disengage from that acceleration of actions and expectations that has been a crucial feature of industrial societies.

[edit] Population Biology

In the field of Population biology, the study of populations of organisms in their environments, there is a principle which states that no unused niche will remain unused if a population that can fill it has access.^{[citation needed]} Thus, any decrease in worldwide footprint will eventually result in an increase in population, as the newly unused resources are re-claimed by new humans. Conversely, and more pertinently for environmental sustainability, any increase in footprint will eventually result in a population decline. This can be summarised by the formula:

Population = Land/ecological footprint ,

the equality symbol here indicating eventual balance.

It is quite possible that in the short term,

population * ecological footprint > land

in which case some adjustment will eventually be made. Further, when the land is put under stress there can be a decline in its fertility, e.g. desertification, over-fishing. In this case the ecological footprint required even for a basic subsistence increases.

[edit] Criticisms

Calculated footprints can be inaccurate due to simplifying assumptions. Many factors of the calculations are based on crude estimates and the numbers may not be applicable to all places (the method is biased to Northern Hemisphere lifestyles). Also, the model generally does not count multiple uses of land: a forest is a carbon sink and the same area is not counted for food production.

The bioproductivity-based Ecological Footprint method rewards the increase of high-productivity monocultures by assigning a higher biocapacity to that region. The bioproductivity-Footprint has to be complemented with a biodiversity-Footprint.

The per-person nature of footprinting is questionable. For example, the model favors households with more children: A large house with ten children has a smaller per-person footprint than a house half its size with only one person. This could be a perverse result, since having more children might add to global overpopulation, with high ecological costs in the future. This would only occur if most of the world had or began having large families. Currently many countries are experiencing slow or even negative population growth (ex.Bulgaria, Latvia, Estonia, Germany, and Poland). To counter these uncertainties, the models of ecological footprinting are constantly being refined. However, not all criticisms can be resolved (van den Bergh and Verbruggen, 2000) .

[edit] Ecological Footprint Studies in the United Kingdom

The UK'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).^[1] Two recent studies have examined relatively low-impact small communities. BedZED, a 96-home mixed-income housing development in South London, was designed by Bill Dunster Architects and sustainability consultants BioRegional for the Peabody Trust. Despite being populated by relatively "mainstream" home-buyers, BedZED was found to have a footprint of 3.20 gha due to on-site renewable energy production, energy-efficient architecture, and an extensive green lifestyles program that included on-site London's first carsharing club. The report did not measure the added footprint of the 15,000 visitors who have toured BedZED since its completion in 2002. Findhorn Ecovillage, a rural intentional community in Moray, Scotland, had a total footprint of 3.86 gha, including both the many guests and visitors who travel to the community to undertake residential course there and the nearby campus of Cluny Hill College. However, the residents alone have a footprint of 2.78 gha, a little over half the UK national average and the lowest ecological footprint of any community measured so far in the industrialised world.^[2]

[edit] References

[edit] See also

• Ageing population
• Carbon footprint
• Deep ecology
• Ecological economics
• Ecology movement
• Ecosystem valuation
• Environmental impact assessment
• Georgism
• Green conventions, meetings & events
• Overpopulation
• The Natural Step
• Urban economics

[edit] External links

[edit] General

• Global Footprint Network Ecological Footprint : Overview
• World Overshoot Day Day on which humanity starts consuming more than nature can regenerate in that year.
• WWF "Living Planet Report", a biannual calculation of national and global footprints
• Ecological Footprint Analysis, Footprint of Nations etc
• Big Picture TV Free video clip of Mathis Wackernagel, co-creator of ecological footprint analysis
• Best Foot Forward Ecological Footprint experts
• Ecological Footprint Cartogram

[edit] Calculators

• Redefining Progress - International households
• Best Foot Forward Ecocal - UK households. WARNING: requires Windows NT or later.
• University of Sydney Integrated Sustainability Analysis at Australian Conservation Foundation. Excel spreadsheet version
• EPA Victoria - Australian calculators for home, office, school, retail, or event
• Powerhouse Museum Eco'tude - Australian schools
• Ministry for the Environment - New Zealand households

Energy and Sustainability Status   Edit
Ecological footprint | Ecosystem services | Kardashev scale | TPE | Human Development Index | Value of Earth | Appropriate technology | Infrastructural capital

Sustainability and Development of Energy   Edit Conversion | Development and Use | Sustainable Energy | Conservation | Transportation