hence, are susceptible to criticisms concerning national boundaries used rather than
environmental units.
Second, for the Footprint Calculator, aggregation operates using the National
Footprint Accounts to inform global Footprints, but also through spatial scaling from
the individual or household level to town level (in the case study) and onwards from
the local to the regional scale (for the corridor). This can be both positive and
negative, and some have espoused that having a single (amalgamated) value in the
Ecological Footprint can be beneficial (e.g., Giljum 2012; as essential for communication, Wiedmann and Barrett 2010). For example, having one value can simplify
the results, which can then be deployed to inform governance (decision-making and
policy-setting). On the other hand, there are many ways at which to arrive at a single
value, and this can confound or simplify things, as the single value cannot convey
the complexity involved.
1.4.4 Data Quality
Like the issue of Aggregation, Data quality impacts the National Footprint Accounts
more than the Footprint Calculator. However, because the National Footprint
Accounts are deployed in the Footprint Calculator, it is a relevant criticism. There
are calculation-based issues that could affect Data quality (refer to Table 1.2). As
shown in Table 1.3, the more frequent issue is associated with some aspect of ‘Data
quality’. This could be attributable to the quality of data reported to governments and
input into United Nations datasets used in the National Footprint Accounts. Additionally, this issue could be compounded by whether information has been updated
recently using recent sources and up-to-date information. The fact that data are
reported with a lag time (e.g. 2020 Edition based on 2016 data) does not help to
keep the editions of the National Footprint Accounts up-to-date.
As for the Footprint Calculator, Data quality could become an issue stemming
from participants’ understanding questions and properly answering them (without
the aid of the interviewer, as would be the case of online participants – who are not
guided in the process of answering the Footprint Calculator online survey). Furthermore, the quality of questions is an important consideration of any survey, including
the questions posed by the Footprint Calculator. It can be challenged, for example,
whether the questions (listed in Appendix 1.1) are exhaustive. Are questions
pertaining to food, housing, and transportation the only questions necessary to
fully determine the Ecological Footprint based on this survey? For example, the
survey does not enquire about food quality (e.g., organic), although it does enquire
about the consumption of processed foods. Regarding the use of renewable energy
(Question 9), Costa Rica as an example uses 95% of renewables (and soon it will
reach 100%), so this question will not be very variable for this country. Lastly, air
transportation (Question 15) is not the norm in most developing countries, including
Costa Rica, where participants may not fly every year – if ever.
16
1 Introduction
environmental units.
Second, for the Footprint Calculator, aggregation operates using the National
Footprint Accounts to inform global Footprints, but also through spatial scaling from
the individual or household level to town level (in the case study) and onwards from
the local to the regional scale (for the corridor). This can be both positive and
negative, and some have espoused that having a single (amalgamated) value in the
Ecological Footprint can be beneficial (e.g., Giljum 2012; as essential for communication, Wiedmann and Barrett 2010). For example, having one value can simplify
the results, which can then be deployed to inform governance (decision-making and
policy-setting). On the other hand, there are many ways at which to arrive at a single
value, and this can confound or simplify things, as the single value cannot convey
the complexity involved.
1.4.4 Data Quality
Like the issue of Aggregation, Data quality impacts the National Footprint Accounts
more than the Footprint Calculator. However, because the National Footprint
Accounts are deployed in the Footprint Calculator, it is a relevant criticism. There
are calculation-based issues that could affect Data quality (refer to Table 1.2). As
shown in Table 1.3, the more frequent issue is associated with some aspect of ‘Data
quality’. This could be attributable to the quality of data reported to governments and
input into United Nations datasets used in the National Footprint Accounts. Additionally, this issue could be compounded by whether information has been updated
recently using recent sources and up-to-date information. The fact that data are
reported with a lag time (e.g. 2020 Edition based on 2016 data) does not help to
keep the editions of the National Footprint Accounts up-to-date.
As for the Footprint Calculator, Data quality could become an issue stemming
from participants’ understanding questions and properly answering them (without
the aid of the interviewer, as would be the case of online participants – who are not
guided in the process of answering the Footprint Calculator online survey). Furthermore, the quality of questions is an important consideration of any survey, including
the questions posed by the Footprint Calculator. It can be challenged, for example,
whether the questions (listed in Appendix 1.1) are exhaustive. Are questions
pertaining to food, housing, and transportation the only questions necessary to
fully determine the Ecological Footprint based on this survey? For example, the
survey does not enquire about food quality (e.g., organic), although it does enquire
about the consumption of processed foods. Regarding the use of renewable energy
(Question 9), Costa Rica as an example uses 95% of renewables (and soon it will
reach 100%), so this question will not be very variable for this country. Lastly, air
transportation (Question 15) is not the norm in most developing countries, including
Costa Rica, where participants may not fly every year – if ever.
16
1 Introduction