74
5 Understanding the Complementarities of Environmental …
Table 5.1
(continued)
Footprint category
Key elements of relating a footprint to
a boundary
Advantages over the sole use of the
footprint
Limitations
Chemical footprint (Zijp et al.
2014)
• Chemical footprint: a measure of the
expected cumulative impacts of
chemical mixtures on aquatic
ecosystems for a region
• Chemical boundary: a measure of the
sustainability level or policy target
expressing which chemical impact is
acceptable
• Chemical pollution index: equal to
dividing chemical footprint by
chemical boundary
In addition to computing chemical
footprint, two approaches to define a
chemical boundary are introduced
from the realms of chemical
management practice (policy
boundary) and of research into
ecosystem vulnerability (natural
boundary), so that one can account for
the water volume needed to dilute
chemical pollution due to human
activities to a level below a specified
boundary condition
The methodology proposed faces the
challenges of finding ways to reduce
the uncertainty of weighting that
aggregates the impacts on different
scales and compartments, and of the
complex natural systems that would
hamper the distribution of spatially
variable and ecosystem specific
chemical boundaries. The resulting
chemical footprint is hypothetical and
thus, comparing the footprint with the
boundary should be conducted with
care
Ecological footprint (Borucke
et al. 2013)
• Ecological footprint: a measure of
the land and water area required to
support a given population with
biotic resource extractions and
energy-related carbon emissions
• Biocapacity: a measure of the
biosphere’s regenerative capacity in
terms of the Earth’s terrestrial and
aquatic surface that is biologically
productive to provide the basic
ecosystem services—food, fiber, and
timber products that humanity
consumes
• Ecological deficit/surplus: a measure
of the overshoot/reserve of
biocapacity relative to its ecological
footprint
The comparison to biocapacity
supports the existence of global
overshoot which first occurred in the
mid-1970s. In 2008, human ecological
footprint exceeded at least 50% of the
biocapacity, consuming ecosystem
services that require about 1.5 planets
to regenerate and to assimilate
The carbon component in many cases
contributes almost 100% or even more
of the ecological deficit due to the
omission of the absorptive capacity in
current ecological footprint accounting.
Present global overshoot would be
replaced by a surplus of 0.6 planets
without considering the carbon
component
(continued)
5 Understanding the Complementarities of Environmental …
Table 5.1
(continued)
Footprint category
Key elements of relating a footprint to
a boundary
Advantages over the sole use of the
footprint
Limitations
Chemical footprint (Zijp et al.
2014)
• Chemical footprint: a measure of the
expected cumulative impacts of
chemical mixtures on aquatic
ecosystems for a region
• Chemical boundary: a measure of the
sustainability level or policy target
expressing which chemical impact is
acceptable
• Chemical pollution index: equal to
dividing chemical footprint by
chemical boundary
In addition to computing chemical
footprint, two approaches to define a
chemical boundary are introduced
from the realms of chemical
management practice (policy
boundary) and of research into
ecosystem vulnerability (natural
boundary), so that one can account for
the water volume needed to dilute
chemical pollution due to human
activities to a level below a specified
boundary condition
The methodology proposed faces the
challenges of finding ways to reduce
the uncertainty of weighting that
aggregates the impacts on different
scales and compartments, and of the
complex natural systems that would
hamper the distribution of spatially
variable and ecosystem specific
chemical boundaries. The resulting
chemical footprint is hypothetical and
thus, comparing the footprint with the
boundary should be conducted with
care
Ecological footprint (Borucke
et al. 2013)
• Ecological footprint: a measure of
the land and water area required to
support a given population with
biotic resource extractions and
energy-related carbon emissions
• Biocapacity: a measure of the
biosphere’s regenerative capacity in
terms of the Earth’s terrestrial and
aquatic surface that is biologically
productive to provide the basic
ecosystem services—food, fiber, and
timber products that humanity
consumes
• Ecological deficit/surplus: a measure
of the overshoot/reserve of
biocapacity relative to its ecological
footprint
The comparison to biocapacity
supports the existence of global
overshoot which first occurred in the
mid-1970s. In 2008, human ecological
footprint exceeded at least 50% of the
biocapacity, consuming ecosystem
services that require about 1.5 planets
to regenerate and to assimilate
The carbon component in many cases
contributes almost 100% or even more
of the ecological deficit due to the
omission of the absorptive capacity in
current ecological footprint accounting.
Present global overshoot would be
replaced by a surplus of 0.6 planets
without considering the carbon
component
(continued)