this scale was not possible. Scale-wise, the focus is on household–community level
Footprints in the corridor, representing the local–regional spatial scale in southern
Costa Rica. The location is the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor, that connects
the upland region to lower parts of the corridor along the main river valley. More
specifically, Daugherty (2005) identified the central (core) location of the study area
in the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor as linking Los Cusingos Neotropical
Bird Sanctuary with the Las Nubes Biological Reserve through the Río Peñas
Blancas. This area is connected to Mexico and Panama as part of the Mesoamerican
Biological Corridor.
4.2 Case Aim and Objectives
This research examines the Ecological Footprint at the household–community scale
in order to decipher contributing variables affecting local–regional Footprints in the
Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor, Costa Rica. Farmers located in this study
area were approached to complete Footprint Calculator surveys to help inform
their consumption across the main categories of the calculator, including food,
housing, and transportation (http://www.footprintcalculator.org/). These categories
were based on the Footprint Calculator online survey.
According to a news release by the Global Footprint Network (2010): “The
calculator takes users through a series of questions about their lifestyle, and determines their Ecological Footprint – the amount of land area it takes to produce all the
resources they consume and absorb their CO 2 emissions. It also identifies their
greatest areas of resource consumption and translates this into the number of planets
we would need if everyone lived that way.” The Ecological Footprint can be
deployed as an educational tool (Barrett et al. 2005; Lenzen and Murray 2003;
McManus and Haughton 2006) to help communities understand the impacts that
their lifestyle choices may have on the environment. In the current study, however,
the reverse was the case – and the Ecological Footprint was informed by study
participants who inadvertently provided lessons learned (refer to Sect. 5.2). As
mentioned previously, this tool does not output information regarding biocapacity,
so that it was not possible to determine how much of the biocapacity was being taken
up by their Ecological Footprint. However, the national figures can help to inform
this assessment. Furthermore, the ‘one planet’ approach (1 Earth) was adopted to
replace biocapacity for comparisons in the sustainability assessment.
The Footprint Calculator has already been applied – with geographically-specific
information – to countries such as the United States, Australia, Switzerland, and
Calgary (Canada), including Spanish-speaking countries such as Ecuador, Peru, and
Argentina (Global Footprint Network 2010). This is a relevant consideration because
geographical location matters – in addition to lifestyle choices – in controlling
national variables that may be impacting the Ecological Footprint due to societal
influences on ecological demand (Global Footprint Network 2010). However, it
should be noted here that this is a global calculator and does not differentiate
4.2 Case Aim and Objectives
55
Footprints in the corridor, representing the local–regional spatial scale in southern
Costa Rica. The location is the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor, that connects
the upland region to lower parts of the corridor along the main river valley. More
specifically, Daugherty (2005) identified the central (core) location of the study area
in the Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor as linking Los Cusingos Neotropical
Bird Sanctuary with the Las Nubes Biological Reserve through the Río Peñas
Blancas. This area is connected to Mexico and Panama as part of the Mesoamerican
Biological Corridor.
4.2 Case Aim and Objectives
This research examines the Ecological Footprint at the household–community scale
in order to decipher contributing variables affecting local–regional Footprints in the
Alexander Skutch Biological Corridor, Costa Rica. Farmers located in this study
area were approached to complete Footprint Calculator surveys to help inform
their consumption across the main categories of the calculator, including food,
housing, and transportation (http://www.footprintcalculator.org/). These categories
were based on the Footprint Calculator online survey.
According to a news release by the Global Footprint Network (2010): “The
calculator takes users through a series of questions about their lifestyle, and determines their Ecological Footprint – the amount of land area it takes to produce all the
resources they consume and absorb their CO 2 emissions. It also identifies their
greatest areas of resource consumption and translates this into the number of planets
we would need if everyone lived that way.” The Ecological Footprint can be
deployed as an educational tool (Barrett et al. 2005; Lenzen and Murray 2003;
McManus and Haughton 2006) to help communities understand the impacts that
their lifestyle choices may have on the environment. In the current study, however,
the reverse was the case – and the Ecological Footprint was informed by study
participants who inadvertently provided lessons learned (refer to Sect. 5.2). As
mentioned previously, this tool does not output information regarding biocapacity,
so that it was not possible to determine how much of the biocapacity was being taken
up by their Ecological Footprint. However, the national figures can help to inform
this assessment. Furthermore, the ‘one planet’ approach (1 Earth) was adopted to
replace biocapacity for comparisons in the sustainability assessment.
The Footprint Calculator has already been applied – with geographically-specific
information – to countries such as the United States, Australia, Switzerland, and
Calgary (Canada), including Spanish-speaking countries such as Ecuador, Peru, and
Argentina (Global Footprint Network 2010). This is a relevant consideration because
geographical location matters – in addition to lifestyle choices – in controlling
national variables that may be impacting the Ecological Footprint due to societal
influences on ecological demand (Global Footprint Network 2010). However, it
should be noted here that this is a global calculator and does not differentiate
4.2 Case Aim and Objectives
55