2.2 Sustainability Metrics
In order to assess our current status and progress in attaining sustainability at any
scale, it is necessary to be able to qualify it using performance indicators. The
Ecological Footprint is one of such indicators that enables us to ascertain whether
we are living sustainably within the Earth’s limits. Carrying capacity will be
addressed in the next chapter (Chap. 3) and is one of the essential aspects that
needs to be determined at various scales, including at the planetary level. This has
been an area of research interest recently, as planetary health and the boundaries
needed to attain this are being addressed (Čuček et al. 2015; Fang et al. 2015; Häyhä
et al. 2016; O’Neill et al. 2018).
The Ecological Footprint is a composite indicator that includes different components (crop land, grazing land, forest land, fishing grounds, built-up land, and
carbon), including five that are based on production and only one (carbon) that is a
waste component (Fig. 2.1, based on the Global Footprint Network 2020). Built-up
land assumes that urbanisation is taking up previously productive land that could
have been used for agriculture (as crop land). Criticisms have targeted that the
Ecological Footprint only considers anthropogenic land use (utility theory,
e.g. Venetoulis and Talberth 2008) and does not recognise non-productive land,
although this is considered in the built-up land component – although under the
assumption that cities are occupying formerly productive land.
As an environmental indicator, the Ecological Footprint only indirectly considers
human activities and behaviour. Unlike the Human Development Index, which is
based on three variables, namely life expectancy, per person gross domestic product
(GDP), and a combined educational indicator, consisting of adult literacy rates and
primary, secondary, and tertiary school enrolment rates. However, this
BC Components, 1961-2016
3.5
Year
0.5
1.5
2.5
3
2
1
0
1 9 6 1
1 9 6 4
1 9 6 7
1 9 7 0
1 9 7 3
1 9 7 6
1 9 7 9
1 9 8 2
1 9 8 5
1 9 8 8
1 9 9 1
1 9 9 4
1 9 9 7
2 0 0 0
2 0 0 3
2 0 0 6
2 0 0 9
2 0 1 2
2 0 1 5
(gha/capita)
Cropland
Fishing Grounds
Grazing Land
Built-up Land
Forest Products
Carbon
Fig. 2.1 Components of the world’s Ecological Footprint, 1961–2016. (Source: Global Footprint
Network 2020)
2.2 Sustainability Metrics
35
In order to assess our current status and progress in attaining sustainability at any
scale, it is necessary to be able to qualify it using performance indicators. The
Ecological Footprint is one of such indicators that enables us to ascertain whether
we are living sustainably within the Earth’s limits. Carrying capacity will be
addressed in the next chapter (Chap. 3) and is one of the essential aspects that
needs to be determined at various scales, including at the planetary level. This has
been an area of research interest recently, as planetary health and the boundaries
needed to attain this are being addressed (Čuček et al. 2015; Fang et al. 2015; Häyhä
et al. 2016; O’Neill et al. 2018).
The Ecological Footprint is a composite indicator that includes different components (crop land, grazing land, forest land, fishing grounds, built-up land, and
carbon), including five that are based on production and only one (carbon) that is a
waste component (Fig. 2.1, based on the Global Footprint Network 2020). Built-up
land assumes that urbanisation is taking up previously productive land that could
have been used for agriculture (as crop land). Criticisms have targeted that the
Ecological Footprint only considers anthropogenic land use (utility theory,
e.g. Venetoulis and Talberth 2008) and does not recognise non-productive land,
although this is considered in the built-up land component – although under the
assumption that cities are occupying formerly productive land.
As an environmental indicator, the Ecological Footprint only indirectly considers
human activities and behaviour. Unlike the Human Development Index, which is
based on three variables, namely life expectancy, per person gross domestic product
(GDP), and a combined educational indicator, consisting of adult literacy rates and
primary, secondary, and tertiary school enrolment rates. However, this
BC Components, 1961-2016
3.5
Year
0.5
1.5
2.5
3
2
1
0
1 9 6 1
1 9 6 4
1 9 6 7
1 9 7 0
1 9 7 3
1 9 7 6
1 9 7 9
1 9 8 2
1 9 8 5
1 9 8 8
1 9 9 1
1 9 9 4
1 9 9 7
2 0 0 0
2 0 0 3
2 0 0 6
2 0 0 9
2 0 1 2
2 0 1 5
(gha/capita)
Cropland
Fishing Grounds
Grazing Land
Built-up Land
Forest Products
Carbon
Fig. 2.1 Components of the world’s Ecological Footprint, 1961–2016. (Source: Global Footprint
Network 2020)
2.2 Sustainability Metrics
35