2.5 Conclusions
Although it has been strictly classified as an environmental composite indicator
(Strezov et al. 2017), the Ecological Footprint and biocapacity accounting methodology integrates human activities, as through its consideration of economic factors
like trade. To be an integrated sustainability metric, it needs to consider the environmental and socioeconomic dimensions as well as entail the cultural domain that
may impact other aspects. The Ecological Footprint, as the demand-side of the
methodology, encapsulates human lifestyles influencing resource use and the incumbent generation of wastes. In this way, it functions as a simple I-O system, where
flows are controlled by the pull from human demand to consume resources. This is
affected by the level of societal development, but also by population size and other
factors. The next chapter (Chap. 3) of this brief examines carrying capacity with a
focus on biocapacity.
References
Adger WN, Hughes TP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Rockström J (2005) Social-ecological resilience to
coastal disasters. Science 309:1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1112122
Allen TFH, Bandurski BL, King AW (1993) Ecosystem approach: theory and ecosystem integrity.
International Joint Commission, Windsor. https://legacyfiles.ijc.org/publications/ID733.pdf
Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G, Gracey K, Iha K, Larson J, Lazarus E, Wackernagel M, Galli A
(2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the National
Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol Indic 24:518–533. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005
Brown BJ, Hanson ME, Liverman DM, Merideth RW Jr (1987) Global sustainability: toward
definition. Environ Manag 11(6):713–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867238
Checkland P (1999) Systems thinking. Chapter 3. In: Currie WL, Galliers B (eds) Rethinking
management information systems. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 45–56
Collins A, Galli A, Patrizi N, Pulselli FM (2018) Learning and teaching sustainability: the
contribution of ecological footprint calculators. J Clean Prod 174:1000–1010. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.024
Collins A, Galli A, Hipwood T, Murthy A (2020) Living within a one planet reality: the contribution of personal footprint calculators. Environ Res Lett 15(2):025008. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1748-9326/ab5f96
Common M, Perrings C (1992) Towards an ecological economics of sustainability. Ecol Econ
6:7–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(92)90036-R
Costanza R, Patten BC (1995) Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecol Econ 15(3):193–196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(95)00048-8
Čuček L, Klemeš JJ, Varbanov PS, Kravanja Z (2015) Significance of environmental footprints for
evaluating sustainability and security of development. Clean Technol Envir 17(8):2125–2141.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0972-3
Daly HE (2008) Towards a steady-state economy. Essay commissioned by the Sustainable Development Commission, UK (April 24, 2008). https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2015/ENS242/um/
55677449/3_Daly_2008_Towards_a_Steady_State_Economy.pdf
Fang K, Heijungs R, de Snoo GR (2015) Understanding the complementary linkages between
environmental footprints and planetary boundaries in a footprint–boundary environmental
38
2 The Ecological Footprint
Although it has been strictly classified as an environmental composite indicator
(Strezov et al. 2017), the Ecological Footprint and biocapacity accounting methodology integrates human activities, as through its consideration of economic factors
like trade. To be an integrated sustainability metric, it needs to consider the environmental and socioeconomic dimensions as well as entail the cultural domain that
may impact other aspects. The Ecological Footprint, as the demand-side of the
methodology, encapsulates human lifestyles influencing resource use and the incumbent generation of wastes. In this way, it functions as a simple I-O system, where
flows are controlled by the pull from human demand to consume resources. This is
affected by the level of societal development, but also by population size and other
factors. The next chapter (Chap. 3) of this brief examines carrying capacity with a
focus on biocapacity.
References
Adger WN, Hughes TP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Rockström J (2005) Social-ecological resilience to
coastal disasters. Science 309:1036–1039. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1112122
Allen TFH, Bandurski BL, King AW (1993) Ecosystem approach: theory and ecosystem integrity.
International Joint Commission, Windsor. https://legacyfiles.ijc.org/publications/ID733.pdf
Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G, Gracey K, Iha K, Larson J, Lazarus E, Wackernagel M, Galli A
(2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: the National
Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol Indic 24:518–533. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005
Brown BJ, Hanson ME, Liverman DM, Merideth RW Jr (1987) Global sustainability: toward
definition. Environ Manag 11(6):713–719. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867238
Checkland P (1999) Systems thinking. Chapter 3. In: Currie WL, Galliers B (eds) Rethinking
management information systems. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 45–56
Collins A, Galli A, Patrizi N, Pulselli FM (2018) Learning and teaching sustainability: the
contribution of ecological footprint calculators. J Clean Prod 174:1000–1010. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.11.024
Collins A, Galli A, Hipwood T, Murthy A (2020) Living within a one planet reality: the contribution of personal footprint calculators. Environ Res Lett 15(2):025008. https://doi.org/10.1088/
1748-9326/ab5f96
Common M, Perrings C (1992) Towards an ecological economics of sustainability. Ecol Econ
6:7–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(92)90036-R
Costanza R, Patten BC (1995) Defining and predicting sustainability. Ecol Econ 15(3):193–196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(95)00048-8
Čuček L, Klemeš JJ, Varbanov PS, Kravanja Z (2015) Significance of environmental footprints for
evaluating sustainability and security of development. Clean Technol Envir 17(8):2125–2141.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0972-3
Daly HE (2008) Towards a steady-state economy. Essay commissioned by the Sustainable Development Commission, UK (April 24, 2008). https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/jaro2015/ENS242/um/
55677449/3_Daly_2008_Towards_a_Steady_State_Economy.pdf
Fang K, Heijungs R, de Snoo GR (2015) Understanding the complementary linkages between
environmental footprints and planetary boundaries in a footprint–boundary environmental
38
2 The Ecological Footprint