DOCSLIB.ORG

A New Perspective on the Wealth of Our Nation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A New Perspective on the Wealth of Our Nation State of the States A new perspective on the wealth of our nation Global Footprint Network 1 Which states need to start managing their ecological budgets? All of them. Why? Although the United States is one of the richest nations in the world in terms of natural capital, it is running an ecological deficit. U.S. citizens demand twice the renewable natural resources and services that are available within our nation’s borders. Yet the economic vitality of our nation depends on these valuable ecological assets. Because our economic system developed during a time when these resources were abundant, decisions were made without considering the explicit contribution of nature to economic activity. As these resources are becoming increasingly scarce worldwide, we need new tools to manage them more effectively. 2 In 2015, Ecological Deficit Day landed on July 14. U.S. Ecological Deficit Daymarks the date when the United States has exceeded nature’s budget for the year. The nation’s annual demand for the goods and services that our land and seas can provide — fruits and vegetables, meat, fish, wood, cotton for clothing, and carbon dioxide absorption — now exceeds what our nation’s ecosystems can renew this year. Similar to how a person can go into debt with a credit card, our nation is running an ecological deficit. 3 The richest country? Almost. The United States is the third-richest country in the world, based on biocapacity,1 a measure of the biological productivity of its ecosystems. Brazil ranks first and China second. Within the United States, biocapacity varies widely by state. Biocapacity (in global acres) < 20 million ga 20 – 60 million ga 60 – 80 million ga 80 – 100 million ga 100 – 170 million ga 360 million ga No data 1For a complete glossary of terms related to the Ecological Footprint and biocapacity, visit www.footprintnetwork.org/glossary. 4 Measuring ecological wealth Just as a bank statement tracks income against expenditures, Global Footprint Network measures a population’s demand for and ecosystems’ supply of resources and services. Forest land On the supply side, a city, state, or nation’s biocapacity rep- Grazing land resents its biologically productive land and sea area, including forest lands, grazing lands, cropland, fishing grounds, and built-up land. Built-up land On the demand side, the Ecological Footprint measures a population’s demand for plant-based food and fiber products, live- stock and fish products, timber and other forest products, space for urban infrastructure, and forest to absorb its carbon dioxide Carbon emissions from fossil fuels. Footprint Both measures are expressed in global acres — globally Cropland comparable, standardized acres with world average productivity. Each city, state, or nation’s Ecological Footprint can be Fishing grounds compared to its biocapacity. If a population’s demand for ecological assets exceeds the supply, that region runs an ecological deficit. A region in ecological deficit meets demand by importing, liquidating its own ecological assets (such as overfishing), and/or emitting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. For a more technical explanation of the calculations in this report, visit www.footprintnetwork.otrg/statestechnical. 5 Big Footprint The United States has the second-largest share of the world’s overall Ecological SHARE OF GLOBAL ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT Footprint, trailing only China, whose popula- tion is more than four times that of the United States. The total Footprint of the United States is also nearly twice that of India, although nearly four times as many China people live in India. The per-person Ecological Footprint in the United States is more than twice 18% China that of China and more than seven times 12% United States that of India. 6% India 3% Russian Federation 3% Brazil 58% Rest of world 6 Net biocapacity Different parts of the world are endowed with different resources and consume resources at different rates. In a globalized world, countries meet their demand for resources through trade. As resources become increasingly limited, countries running an ecological deficit can be exposed to economic risk if the costs of imports rise. In addition to trade, countries can fall into ecological deficit if they emit more carbon dioxide than their own ecosystems can absorb. Countries in this situation are more exposed to the risks of fossil fuels and carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels becoming more expensive. 4.0 Ecological Creditor: Biocapacity larger than Ecological Footprint Ecological Debtor: Ecological Footprint larger than biocapacity 3.0 2.0 1.0 Germany United States China 0 -1.0 Brazil Russia Global Acres (in billions) -2.0 -3.0 -4.0 7 Net biocapacity Global Acres (in millions) relativelandproductivity. to eachstate’s estimated byallocatingtheU.S.biocapacityproportional relativeconsumptionlevel.Statebiocapacitywas state’s justing thenationalaverageEcologicalFootprintby EcologicalFootprintwascalculatedbyad Each state’s statesarecurrentlylivingwithinthemeansoftheirnaturalresources. only 16 With anabundanceofresources,lowerEcologicalFootprints,and/orsmallerpopulations, -500 -450 -400 -350 -300 -250 -150 150 250 350 Each stateisunique,andstatescaneasilytrade -50 50 Alaska Ecological Debtor: Ecological Creditor: South Dakota Montana Nebraska Arkansas Kansas Maine Ecological Footprint largerthanbiocapacity Biocapacity larger thanEcologicalFootprint Mississippi North Dakota Wyoming Oregon Oklahoma Idaho Vermont - Iowa West Virginia and morevaluable.States(aswellascitiesregions) in whichnaturalcapitalbecomesincreasinglyscarce sources carefullymaybebetterpositionedforafuture statesthatmanagetheirre increases. Consequently, impacts associatedwithsuchtrade,asfoodprice Buttherecanbeeconomic resources witheachother. Alabama New Mexico Minnesota District of Columbia New Hampshire Rhode Island Delaware Louisiana Missouri Kentucky Wisconsin South Carolina Nevada Tennessee by state Washington Utah - Michigan Connecticut land, andinvestinginpublictransportationsystems. tives toconsumers,adoptingpoliciesprotectpublic incen tax renewable energygoals,offering establishing population’s Ecological Footprint.Examplesinclude borders tomanagetheirresourcesandinfluence have substantialautonomytosetpolicywithintheir Colorado Indiana Georgia Arizona North Carolina Massachusetts Maryland Virginia Pennsylvania Illinois Ohio New Jersey New York Florida Texas California - 8 Urban vs. suburban Comparing New York, the state with the lowest Ecological Footprint per capita, and Virginia, the state with the highest, exposes striking differences. Breaking down the Ecological Footprint by consumes substantially more coal than Virginia. Housing comprises a larger land type shows that New York’s carbon New York.2 portion of Virginia’s Footprint than in New York, footprint per person is nearly half that of Vir- Another breakdown of the Ecological in part, because the average house in Virginia ginia, driven in part by the higher density of Footprint, by consumption category, reveals is larger than in New York.3 Transportation New York City, which enables greater public housing and transportation are driving demand is higher in Virginia because the transit use. In addition, Virginia produces and Footprint differences in New York and state is less compact than New York. Virginia 24.6 global acres per person New York 14.2 global acres per person ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT By land type By consumption category Carbon Footprint Food Built-up land Housing Fishing ground Personal Transportation Forest land Goods Grazing land Services Cropland Government Footprint by Footprint by Footprint by Footprint by Major Infrastructure (housing LAND TYPE CONSUMPTION LAND TYPE CONSUMPTION bridges, roads, factories) 2, 3 U.S. Energy Information Administration. 9 Our addiction to fossil fuels The carbon footprint comprises 67 percent of the Ecological Footprint of the entire United States, up from 53 percent in 1961. The United States’ unusually high per person carbon footprint — 8th highest in the world — exposes the nation to more risk should fossil fuels become less available, more expensive, or even obsolete in the future. 5.4% Carbon Footprint4 (global acres per capita) Renewables 11.7% % (percent of primary United States 11.5 energy consumption from renewables, 2013) Germany 6.0 33.5% 5.9% Brazil 1.4 9.3% 9.9% Russia 6.8 World 3.6 China 2.8 4 One global acre of forest can absorb 1.4 tons of carbon dioxide. Source: BP. June 2015. BP Statistical Review of World Energy. 10 States opportunity totapintosolarandwindenergy is clearlypreparingforafutureinwhichsustainableenergyplaysmuchlargerrole, whichisalreadywell-exploitedandverygeographically specific.Still,theUnitedStates those statescomesfromhydropower, themajorityofrenewableenergyin sixstatesarefartheraheadinoverallrenewableenergydependence.However, year, While Californiabecamethefirststatetogeneratemorethan5percentofitselectricity fromutility-scalesolarearlierthis torenewableenergy Transitioning 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 5, 6 Bloomberg New Energy Finance and the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, Sustainable EnergyinAmerica 2015Factbook. Bloomberg NewEnergyFinance andtheBusinessCouncil forSustainable Energy, Renewables Idaho Washington Oregon South Dakota Maine as percentageofelectricitygeneration Montana California Vermont Iowa Alaska New York North Dakota on acleanerpath Minnesota Kansas Oklahoma isoneofthemostpowerfulwaysforastateandnationtoloweritsEcologicalFootprint. Nevada Tennessee Colorado 6 toreducethecarbonintensityoftheireconomies.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Ecological Footprint Emerged As a Response to the Challenge of Sustainable Development, Which Aims at Securing Everybody's Well-Being Within Planetary Constraints
    16 Ecological Footprint accounts The Ecological Footprint emerged as a response to the challenge of sustainable development, which aims at securing everybody's well-being within planetary constraints. It sharpens sustainable development efforts by offering a metric for this challenge’s core condition: keeping the human metabolism within the means of what the planet can renew. Therefore, Ecological Footprint accounting seeks to answer one particular question: How much of the biosphere’s (or any region’s) regenerative capacity does any human activity demand? The condition of keeping humanity’s material demands within the amount the planet can renew is a minimum requirement for sustainability. While human demands can exceed what the planet renew s for some time, exceeding it leads inevitably to (unsustainable) depletion of nature’s stocks. Such depletion can only be maintained temporarily. In this chapter we outline the underlying principles that are the foundation of Ecological Footprint accounting. 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Runninghead Right-hand pages: 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Runninghead Left-hand pages: Mathis Wackernagel et al. 16 Ecological Footprint accounts Principles 1 Mathis Wackernagel, Alessandro Galli, Laurel Hanscom, David Lin, Laetitia Mailhes, and Tony Drummond 1. Introduction – addressing all demands on nature, from carbon emissions to food and fibres Through the Paris Climate Agreement, nearly 200 countries agreed to keep global temperature rise to less than 2°C above the pre-industrial level. This goal implies ending fossil fuel use globally well before 2050 ( Anderson, 2015 ; Figueres et al., 2017 ; Rockström et al., 2017 ). The term “net carbon” in the agreement further suggests humanity needs far more than just a transition to clean energy; managing land to support many competing needs also will be crucial.
    [Show full text]
  • Partial Correlation Analysis of Association Between Subjective Well-Being and Ecological Footprint
    sustainability Article Partial Correlation Analysis of Association between Subjective Well-Being and Ecological Footprint Jinting Zhang 1, F. Benjamin Zhan 2, Xiu Wu 2,* and Daojun Zhang 3 1 School of Resource and Environmental Science, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430079, China; [email protected] 2 Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA; [email protected] 3 College of Economics and Management, Northwest A&F University, Xianyang 712100, China; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-512-781-0041 Abstract: A spatial-temporal panel dataset was collected from 101 countries during 2006–2016. Using partial correlation (PC) and ordinary correlation (OR) analyses, this research examines the relation- ship between ecological footprint (EF) and subjective well-being (SWB) to measure environmental impacts on people’s happiness. Gross domestic product (GDP), urbanization rate (UR), literacy rate (LR), youth life expectancy (YLE), wage and salaried workers (WSW), political stability (PS), voice accountability (VA) are regarded as control variables. Total bio-capacity (TBC), ecological crop-land footprints (ECL), ecological grazing-land footprint (EGL), and ecological built-up land footprint (EBL) have significant positive influences on SWB, but ecological fish-land (EFL) has significant negative influences on SWB. Ecological carbon footprint (ECF) is significantly negatively related to SWB in developed countries. An increase in the amount of EF factors is associated with a country’s degree of development. Political social–economic impacts on SWB disguised environmental contribution on SWB, especially CBF impacts on SWB. The use of PC in examining the association between SWB and EF helps bridge a knowledge gap and facilitate a better understanding of happiness.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Progress in the Degrowth Transition to a Steady State Economy
    ECOLEC-03966; No of Pages 11 Ecological Economics xxx (2011) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ecological Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon Measuring progress in the degrowth transition to a steady state economy Daniel W. O'Neill ⁎ Sustainability Research Institute, School of Earth and Environment, University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy, 5101 S. 11th Street, Arlington, VA 22204, USA article info abstract Article history: In order to determine whether degrowth is occurring, or how close national economies are to the concept of a Received 27 January 2011 steady state economy, clear indicators are required. Within this paper I analyse four indicator approaches that Received in revised form 16 April 2011 could be used: (1) Gross Domestic Product, (2) the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, (3) biophysical Accepted 27 May 2011 and social indicators, and (4) a composite indicator. I conclude that separate biophysical and social indicators Available online xxxx represent the best approach, but a unifying conceptual framework is required to choose appropriate indicators and interpret the relationships between them. I propose a framework based on ends and means, Keywords: Indicators and a set of biophysical and social indicators within this framework. The biophysical indicators are derived Degrowth from Herman Daly's definition of a steady state economy, and measure the major stocks and flows in the Steady state economy economy–environment system. The social indicators are based on the stated goals of the degrowth Conceptual framework movement, and measure the functioning of the socio-economic system, and how effectively it delivers well- being.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Intervention Disparities and the Poverty–Environment Nexus in the Lower Mekong Basin: Understanding Environmental
    Development Intervention Disparities and the Poverty–Environment Nexus in the Lower Mekong Basin: Understanding Environmental Services in a Meso-scale Perspective Peter Messerli1, Andreas Heinimann2 1Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South, c/o Lao National Mekong Committee Secretariat (LNMCS), Vientiane, Lao PDR 2Swiss National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR) North-South, Centre for Devel- opment and Environment (CDE), University of Bern, Switzerland. [email protected] 1. Introduction “Linking Research to Strengthen Upland Policies and Practice” - This overall theme of the SSLWM conference 2006 suggests that policies and practices in upland development are gen- erally deemed to be of better quality and higher impact if they are knowledge-driven or re- search-based. Nevertheless, the linkages between policy and research are not always smooth. This can partly be imputed to knowledge production itself, as among other: decisions-makers are often provided with contradicting answers for one question, levels of aggregation of re- sults are frequently incompatible with the politico-administrative levels of decision making, simplistic blueprint solutions are offered for complex realities, or vice versa it seems impossi- ble to make any generalisation beyond specific case studies. Such misunderstandings between development practice and knowledge production frequently emerge from ignoring some fun- damental questions, which are important to researchers and practitioners alike. • What kind of development shall be pursued? • What knowledge is necessary to support such a development? • What approaches are necessary that allow the production of such knowledge? | downloaded: 2.10.2021 The research project presented in this paper is committed to sustainable development in Lao PDR.
    [Show full text]
  • WATCH OUT, DEAR SWITZERLAND! Too Small to Act Or Too Exposed to Wait?
    Global Footprint Network 18, Avenue Louis-Casaï 1209 Geneva, Switzerland [email protected] www.footprintnetwork.org WATCH OUT, DEAR SWITZERLAND! Too small to act or too exposed to wait? Assembled by Mathis Wackernagel We are proposing a plan of action. It is a fresh plan because we now live in a new era of climate change and resource constraints. Switzerland has been economically successful. And if we choose wisely, Switzerland can stay successful. But will we? Today’s resource paradox Despite its limited natural resources, Switzerland shines as one of the world's most competitive and innovative economies, with low unemployment, a highly skilled labour force, and a per capita GDP among the highest in the world.1 But can this success last, given growing ecological constraints around the globe and the multi-faceted impacts of climate change? Is it necessary to stay within 2°C warming as the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement stipulates? 2 If we do not curb our emissions, will climate change increase the resource pressure and its unpredictability? Switzerland is already heavily resource dependent. For instance, the country eats twice as much as it can grow. As a whole, it consumes four times as much as Swiss ecosystems can regenerate.3 It does this even though Article 73 of the Swiss constitution urges that “Confederation and the Cantons shall endeavour to achieve a balanced and sustainable relationship between nature and its capacity to renew itself and the demands placed on it by the population.” Given the new era of climate change and resource constraints, what does Switzerland need to do to remain successful? Opinions vary widely, yet the stakes are high.
    [Show full text]
  • The Information About the 3 Sub-Projects Needs to Be Worked Over
    Global Footprint Network What We Do www.footprintnetwork.org THE PROBLEM Today, humanity consumes more than the Earth can produce. Our economies operate as if ecological resources are limitless, without recognizing that our ever- increasing consumption is unsustainable and is undermining the Earth’s ability to provide for us in the future. Our latest calculations estimate that humanity’s demand on nature, its Ecological Footprint, is 25 percent greater than the planet’s ability to meet this demand. It now takes the Earth one year and three months to regenerate what we use in a year. This global “ecological deficit” or “ecological overshoot” is depleting the natural capital on which both human life and biodiversity depend. Collapsing fisheries, loss of forest cover, depletion of fresh water systems, accumulation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the build-up of wastes and pollutants are just a few noticeable consequences of unchecked human consumption. If these trends continue, ecosystems will collapse, leading to permanent reductions in the Earth’s ability to provide sufficient resources for humanity. While these trends affect us all, they have a disproportionate impact on the poor, who cannot buy themselves out of the problem by getting resources from elsewhere. To move out of this situation, it is imperative that individuals and institutions around the world recognize ecological limits and find ways to live within the Earth’s bounds. By scientifically measuring the supply of, and demand for, ecological resources, the Ecological Footprint provides a resource accounting tool which reveals ecological limits, helps communicate the risk of unchecked resource consumption, and facilitates the sustainable management and preservation of the Earth’s resources.
    [Show full text]
  • FORESIGHT SCIENCE DIVISION1 Brief FORESIGHT February 2018 Brief 006 Early Warning, Emerging Issues and Futures Hacking Economics for People and Planet
    FORESIGHT SCIENCE DIVISION1 Brief FORESIGHT February 2018 Brief 006 Early Warning, Emerging Issues and Futures Hacking economics for people and planet Background of being economically unprosperous or miserable) for the masses while concentrating the ‘wealth’ that results The UN Environment Foresight Briefs are published by from the unsustainable conversion of Nature and human UN Environment to highlight a hotspot of environmental endeavour to money, in the hands of a few. We are change, feature an emerging science topic, or discuss violating planetary boundaries (Folke et al., 2016) and a contemporary environmental issue. This provides the eroding our basic social foundations (Raworth, 2017). opportunity to find out what is happening to the changing With a twist of irony, we have become exceedingly environment and the consequences of everyday choices, adept at accounting for the natural (and social) costs and to think about future directions for policy. This Foresight brief will focus on that particular ‘scientific’ of our unsustainable economic approach. Our inability field, that is seemingly immune to the oft-spoken mantras overall to take concrete actions to reverse negative Introduction promoting change, innovation and new critical thinking in environmental trends is not due to a lack of good all other fields. This is not to conclude that the economic environmental and developmental policy-making or our As global environmentalism and environmental sciences are not imbued with inspirational people, knowing of better practices – if we
    [Show full text]
  • Global Footprint Network Response to the “Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress” (Or “Stiglitz Commission”) Report
    Global Footprint Network response to the “Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress” (or “Stiglitz Commission”) Report www.footprintnetwork.org September 17, 2009 Headquarters Zürich Office Brussels Office 312 Clay Street, Suite 300 c/o Hürzeler & Schmid 168 avenue de Tervurenlaan, Oakland, CA 94607-3510 Ausstellungsstrasse 114 7th Floor USA CH - 8005 Zürich mailbox 15 SWITZERLAND B - 1150 Brussels Tel. +1-510-839-8879 BELGIUM Fax +1-510-251-2410 Tel. +41 44 271 00 67 [email protected] Fax +41 44 251 36 34 Tel. +32-2-773-5198 1 Global Footprint Network response to The “Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress” (“Stiglitz Commission”) Report September 17, 2009 Summary of Global Footprint Network’s comments Global Footprint Network welcomes the Commission’s report and appreciates the Commission’s tremendous work on synthesizing the complex field of measuring economic performance and social progress. This report is a milestone in the history of public indicators and will become a significant platform for further debate. The Commission report’s most significant contribution may be its emphasis on the need to track distinct policy goals separately: economic performance, quality of life, and environmental sustainability. The Ecological Footprint has tremendous potential to support this agenda, for instance as a resource accounting tool and part of a micro-dashboard of economic performance and social progress indicators. The Ecological Footprint fully and wholly contains the carbon Footprint, and takes a comprehensive, more effective, approach by tracking other human demands on the biosphere’s regenerative capacity. But it needs to be complemented by socio- economic metrics.
    [Show full text]
  • THE Guizhou FOOTPRINT REPORT METRICS for an ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION
    THE Guizhou FOOTPRINT REPORT METRICS FOR AN ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION Prepared in collaboration with Guizhou Institute of Environmental Science Research and Design “We should no longer judge the political Executive Summary ...............................................................5 performance simply by GDP growth. Instead, we should look at welfare WHY IS ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION improvement, social development, and 01 ESSENTIAL? ecological benefits to evaluate leaders.” China: An Extraordinary Country Facing Extraordinary – President Xi Jinping Challenges ............................................................................8 Constraints Rule on a Finite Planet ................................... 10 Biocapacity: Our Ultimate Resource ................................ 12 China’s Top Trade Partners: Stable or Vulnerable? ........ 14 MEASURING FOOTPRINT EFFICIENCY 02 Production Footprint associated with generating GDP in China ........................................................................18 Production Footprint associated with generating GDP in Switzerland ....................................................................20 Ecological Footprint of Consumption ...............................22 Ecological Footprint & Human Development Index (HDI) ...26 GUIZHOU, A MODEL FOR DEVELOPING 03 AN ECOLOGICAL CIVILIZATION How does Guizhou’s Resource Situation Compare to other provinces? ............................................................30 “China will continue to commit to international Guizhou’s Development Path ...........................................34
    [Show full text]
  • The Happy Planet Index 2016 28 September 2017 Dr
    Conversaons for a One Planet Region The Happy Planet Index 2016 28 September 2017 Dr. Trevor Hancock Professor and Senior Scholar School of Public Health and Social Policy University of Victoria One-Planet living and the HPI • Globally, our ecological footprint is about 1.5 planets • Its about 3 – 5 planets in high-income countries. – More than 5 PLANETS (8.5 global hectares) • 3 Australia 8.8 • 4 Trinidad and Tobago 8.8 • 5 Canada 8.8 • 6 United States 8.6 • Globally, but also locally, we need a ‘One Planet footprint’ • BUT with a high quality of life and good health for all • What would that look like? How would we get there? Ecological footprint, selected countries, 2013 The available biocapacity per person More than 3 PLANETS on our planet is currently 1.7 global 12 Finland 6.7 hectares = 1 Planet 13 Sweden 6.5 More than 7 PLANETS 19 Austria 6.1 1 Luxembourg 13.1 20 Denmark 6.1 2 Qatar 12.6 24 Netherlands 5.8 More than 5 PLANETS 25 Norway 5.8 3 Australia 8.8 31 Germany 5.5 4 Trinidad & Tobago 8.8 34 Switzerland 5.3 5 Canada 8.8 36 New Zealand 5.1 6 United States 8.6 37 France 5.1 More than 4 PLANETS 38 United Kingdom 5.1 7 Kuwait 8.2 More than 2 PLANETS 8 Mongolia 7.5 39 Japan 5.0 9 Estonia 7.0 40 Ireland 4.8 10 Belgium 6.9 11 Singapore 6.8 Source: Global Footprint Network Progress would mean • Being more like Ireland, Japan, the UK, France or New Zealand – But that would sll be 3 Planets • Current 1 Planet countries (1.7 global hectares, ranked 130 – 136) – Moldova – Georgia – South Sudan – Honduras – Guatemala – Morocco – Viet Nam Swiss almost voted for a One Planet country! • In September 2016 Switzerland voted on whether to implement a green economy.
    [Show full text]
  • The State of the Art in Ecological Footprint Theory and Applications FOOTPRINT
    The State of the Art in Ecological Footprint Theory and Applications FOOTPRINT FORUMEditor Simone Bastianoni Academic Conference 2010Short Communications The State of the Art in Ecological Footprint Theory and Applications FOOTPRINT FORUM 2010 Academic Conference Short Communications Editor Simone Bastianoni We thank the following institutions for their endorsement: Book published for the Academic Conference FOOTPRINT FORUM 2010 Short Communications Colle Val d’Elsa 9th-10th June 2010 Editor Simone Bastianoni Credits graphic design for the cover Francesca Ameglio Pulselli FOREWORD The World is moving towards a severe limitation of resources and, in particular, some of those resources most important for human well-being are approaching their peak point (the point beyond which their withdrawal is no longer convenient). Understanding if a Nation is using its natural stocks and flows of natural resources in a sustainable way is becoming crucial information for policy makers in order to have a complete picture when developing future strategies. Sustainability poses the challenge of determining whether we can hope to see the current level of well-being at least maintained for future generations, and how this can be possible. Since the 1980’s, policy makers and academics as well as the general public have been debating over what sustainable development is, what the best metrics are to measure the level of sustainability a country (or a region), and how to understand and manage the available natural capital. The Ecological Footprint was introduced at the beginning of the 90’s by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees. The Ecological Footprint is, in fact, one of the first comprehensive attempts to measure human carrying capacity, not as a speculative assessment of what the planet might be able to support, but as a description of how many planets it would take in any given year to support human demand of resources in that given year.
    [Show full text]
  • Happy Planet Index Report 2012
    EMBARGO 28.5.2012 00:00 nef (the new economics foundation) is a registered charity founded in 1986 by the leaders of The Other Economic Summit (TOES), which forced issues such as international debt onto the agenda of the G8 summit meetings. It has taken a lead in helping establish new coalitions and organisations such as the Jubilee 2000 debt campaign; the Ethical Trading Initiative; the UK Social Investment Forum; and new ways to measure social and economic well-being. Contents Executive summary .................................................. 3 1. New economy, new indicators ............................. 4 2. A measure of sustainable well-being .................. 6 3. Results: An amber planet .................................. 10 4. Steps towards a happy planet ........................... 17 Appendix: Calculating the Happy Planet Index.... 19 Endnotes ................................................................. 22 1 The Happy Planet Index is a new measure of progress that focusses on what matters: sustainable well-being for all. It tells us how well nations are doing in terms of supporting their inhabitants to live good lives now, while ensuring that others can do the same in the future. In a time of uncertainty, the Index provides a clear compass pointing nations in the direction they need to travel, and helping groups around the world to advocate for a vision of progress that is truly about people’s lives. 2 Executive summary There is a growing global consensus that we need new measures of progress. It is critical that these measures clearly reflect what we value – something the current approach fails to do. The Happy Planet Index (HPI) measures what matters. It tells us how well nations are doing in terms of supporting their inhabitants to live good lives now, while ensuring that others can do the same in the future, i.e.
    [Show full text]