Chapter 7
Conclusion
Abstract In this final chapter, the chief contributions of this brief are presented and
function to further justify the research. A deliberation of the research limitations also
appears here, before suggesting ideas for future research. Finally, there are some
concluding remarks for wrapping up this brief.
Keywords Case study · Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor · Costa Rica
7.1 Contribution
This study has considered various criticisms of the Ecological Footprint and
biocapacity accounting with a focus on the Footprint Calculator. In other words, it
has presented the issues from a critical approach. Such an approach has involved
scrutinising the Footprint Calculator as the instrument of choice in the field surveys
as well as the National Footprint Accounts, on which they draw. These tools are not
without their problems, as for instance noted in the carbon component of the
National Footprint Accounts that attributes zero to biocapacity. The latter needs to
be incorporated into the spreadsheet (e.g., Country_Trends for Costa Rica –
country_code ¼ 48). This issue is also reflected in the Footprint Calculator – that
does not measure production (biocapacity) and only the Ecological Footprint (consumption). Such criticisms have been drawn from a variety of sources, including
published literature and other unpublished sources (e.g., Jira – Issue Tracker in
Chap. 1, see Sect. 1.4.1). One of the chief criticisms, for instance, has been the
focus on consumerism in the developed world – that has augmented the carbon
Footprint in particular. In contrast, the brief’s study area is in a developing country,
where participants were chosen from peasant farmers ‘campesinos’ who are struggling with poverty. In this way, the issue of poverty has entered the research, making
the instrument relevant not only to environmental issues but also socioeconomic
ones. However, the Ecological Footprint is simply deficient in this area as an
environmental composite indicator (Strezov et al. 2017). There is potential to
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
M. J. Thornbush, The Ecological Footprint as a Sustainability Metric,
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62666-2_7
97
Conclusion
Abstract In this final chapter, the chief contributions of this brief are presented and
function to further justify the research. A deliberation of the research limitations also
appears here, before suggesting ideas for future research. Finally, there are some
concluding remarks for wrapping up this brief.
Keywords Case study · Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor · Costa Rica
7.1 Contribution
This study has considered various criticisms of the Ecological Footprint and
biocapacity accounting with a focus on the Footprint Calculator. In other words, it
has presented the issues from a critical approach. Such an approach has involved
scrutinising the Footprint Calculator as the instrument of choice in the field surveys
as well as the National Footprint Accounts, on which they draw. These tools are not
without their problems, as for instance noted in the carbon component of the
National Footprint Accounts that attributes zero to biocapacity. The latter needs to
be incorporated into the spreadsheet (e.g., Country_Trends for Costa Rica –
country_code ¼ 48). This issue is also reflected in the Footprint Calculator – that
does not measure production (biocapacity) and only the Ecological Footprint (consumption). Such criticisms have been drawn from a variety of sources, including
published literature and other unpublished sources (e.g., Jira – Issue Tracker in
Chap. 1, see Sect. 1.4.1). One of the chief criticisms, for instance, has been the
focus on consumerism in the developed world – that has augmented the carbon
Footprint in particular. In contrast, the brief’s study area is in a developing country,
where participants were chosen from peasant farmers ‘campesinos’ who are struggling with poverty. In this way, the issue of poverty has entered the research, making
the instrument relevant not only to environmental issues but also socioeconomic
ones. However, the Ecological Footprint is simply deficient in this area as an
environmental composite indicator (Strezov et al. 2017). There is potential to
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
M. J. Thornbush, The Ecological Footprint as a Sustainability Metric,
SpringerBriefs in Environmental Science,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62666-2_7
97