DOCSLIB.ORG

Ecological Science and Sustainability for a Crowded Planet

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Ecological Science and Sustainability for a Crowded Planet 21st Century Vision and Action Plan for the Ecological Society of America Report from the Ecological Visions Committee* to the Governing Board of the Ecological Society of America April 2004 *Margaret A. Palmer1, Emily S.Bernhardt2, Elizabeth A. Chornesky3, Scott L. Collins4, Andrew P. Dobson5, Clifford S. Duke6, Barry D. Gold7, Robert. Jacobson8, Sharon Kingsland9, Rhonda Kranz6, Michael J Mappin10, M. Luisa Martinez11, Fiorenza Micheli12, Jennifer L. Morse1, Michael L Pace13, Mercedes Pascual14, Stephen Palumbi12, O.J. Reichman15, Alan Townsend16, and Monica G. Turner17 www.esa.org/ecovisions Executive Summary Environmental issues will define the 21st Century, as will a world with a large human population and ecosystems that are increasingly shaped by human intervention. The science of ecology can and should play a greatly expanded role in ensuring a future in which natural systems and the humans they include coexist on a more sustainable planet. Ecological science can use its extensive knowledge of natural systems to develop a greater understanding of how to manage, restore, and create the ecosystems that can deliver the key ecological services that sustain life on our planet. To accomplish this, ecologists will have to forge partnerships at scales and in forms they have not traditionally used. These alliances must implement action plans within three visionary areas: enhance the extent to which decisions are ecologically informed; advance innovative ecological research directed at the sustainability of an over-populated planet; and stimulate cultural changes within the science itself that build a forward-looking and international ecology. New partnerships and large-scale, cross-cutting activities will be key to incorporating ecological solutions in sustainability. We recommend a four-pronged research initiative, to be built on new and existing programs, to enhance research project development, facilitate large-scale experiments and data collection, and link science to solutions. We emphasize the need to improve interactions among researchers, managers, and decision makers. Building public understanding of the links between ecosystem services and human well-being is essential. We urge the development of a major public information campaign to bring issues and raise awareness of ecological sustainability before the general public. Specific recommendations for each visionary area will support rapid progress. Standardization of data collection, data documentation, and data sharing is long overdue and should be kick-started through a data registry, easy access to metadata, and graduate and professional training of ecologists in ecoinformatics. A rapid response team that draws on ecological expertise in responding to legislative and executive branch proposals would result in a larger role for ecological knowledge and ecological scientists in the legislative and policy processes that impact sustainability. We must develop resources that will help ecologists and collaborators from other sciences work together more effectively. A meeting of key leaders in research, management, and business should be convened to produce a plan to create reward systems for ecological researchers and educators, as well as to foster collaborations. We need more global access to ecological knowledge. This effort could be started through routine translation of key ecological articles from non-English to English and vice versa. In addition, strategies to ease the exchange of students, managers and practitioners among institutions in various countries should be implemented. The three visionary areas and the recommendations to achieve them will provide a framework for advancing ecological research and ensuring it plays a key role in public and private discourse. The most critical vision area is the first: building an informed public. The results of simultaneously addressing our recommendations for the three visionary areas will be an ecological science marked by strong regional and global partnerships that will be instrumental in the move toward a more sustainable future for ecosystems and the humans they support. 2 Committee Member Addresses: 1Department of Entomology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-4454, [email protected]; 2De- partment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC; 3P.O. Box 22665, Carmel, CA; 4Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albu- querque, NM; 5Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ; 6Office of Science Programs, Eco- logical Society of America, Washington, DC; 7The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Los Altos, CA; 8U.S. Geological Survey–CERC, Columbia, MO; 9Department of the History of Science and Technology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD; 10University of Calgary, Kananaskis Field Stations, Calgary, Alberta, Canada; 11Departamento de Ecologia Vegetal, Instituto de Ecologia, A.C., Xalapa, Mexico; 12Depart- ment of Biological Sciences, Stanford University, Hopkins Marine Sta- tion, Pacific Grove, CA 93950; 13Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, NY; 14Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Uni- versity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI; 15Department of Ecology, Evolu- tion, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA; 16Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research and Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO; 17De- partment of Zoology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI. 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary................................................................................................................. 2 History and Approach of the Ecological Visions Committee ......................................... 5 The Need for an Action Plan .................................................................................................. 7 VISION 1: ................................................................................................................................ 10 Action Areas for Informing Decisions with Ecological Knowledge (ID) .............. 11 Area A: Integrate advances in ecological knowledge into policy and management decisions that affect ecological sustainability ..................................................... 11 Area B: Foster a thoughtful public today and educate generations of tomorrow so that the best ecological knowledge informs individual choices about sustainability. ....................................................................................................... 14 Summary: Informing Decisions ...................................................................................... 18 VISION 2: ................................................................................................................................ 19 Action Areas for Advancing Innovative and Anticipatory Research (AR) .............. 20 Area A. Build the intellectual and technical infrastructure for ecology. .......................... 20 Area B. Create new incentives to recognize and encourage anticipatory and innovative research ............................................................................................. 25 Area C. Promote the standardization of data collection, data documentation, and data sharing. .................................................................................................. 27 Summary – Innovative and Anticipatory Research..................................................... 29 VISION 3: ................................................................................................................................ 30 Action Areas for Stimulating Cultural Changes for the Ecological Sciences (CC) ... 31 Area A. Capture, translate and disseminate knowledge on successful collaboration. .... 31 Area B. Broaden the human and disciplinary dimensions of ecology. ............................. 32 Area C. Forge international linkages among ecological scientists and globalize access to ecological knowledge. ......................................................................... 34 Summary – Cultural Change ........................................................................................... 36 Literature Cited..................................................................................................................... 37 Acknowledgements................................................................................................................ 41 Appendix 1: Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................ 43 Appendix 2: Summary of Committee Meetings .............................................................. 45 Appendix 3: Ecological Visions Breakfast Briefings ..................................................... 48 Appendix 4: Summary of Responses to the Web-based Survey..................................... 51 4 History and Approach of the Ecological Visions Committee The desire to develop a sustainable future and the research questions nor to prioritize a list of science to accomplish this is widespread, and has research topics. This has already been very been an explicit goal of the Ecological Society of effectively accomplished by many highly America (ESA) for over a decade. The Sustainable esteemed groups and our committee agrees with Biosphere Initiative (Box 1) was produced by the their general assessment (Box 2). In initiating our ESA in an effort to highlight the key role of basic work as a committee,
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

    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.
  • Food Forests: Their Services and Sustainability

    Food Forests: Their Services and Sustainability

    Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development ISSN: 2152-0801 online https://foodsystemsjournal.org Food forests: Their services and sustainability Stefanie Albrecht a * Leuphana University Lüneburg Arnim Wiek b Arizona State University Submitted July 29, 2020 / Revised October 22, 2020, and February 8, 2021 / Accepted Febuary 8, 2021 / Published online July 10, 2021 Citation: Albrecht, S., & Wiek, A (2021). Food forests: Their services and sustainability. Journal of Agriculture, Food Systems, and Community Development, 10(3), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2021.103.014 Copyright © 2021 by the Authors. Published by the Lyson Center for Civic Agriculture and Food Systems. Open access under CC-BY license. Abstract detailed insights on 14 exemplary food forests in Industrialized food systems use unsustainable Europe, North America, and South America, practices leading to climate change, natural gained through site visits and interviews. We resource depletion, economic disparities across the present and illustrate the main services that food value chain, and detrimental impacts on public forests provide and assess their sustainability. The health. In contrast, alternative food solutions such findings indicate that the majority of food forests as food forests have the potential to provide perform well on social-cultural and environmental healthy food, sufficient livelihoods, environmental criteria by building capacity, providing food, services, and spaces for recreation, education, and enhancing biodiversity, and regenerating soil, community building. This study compiles evidence among others. However, for broader impact, food from more than 200 food forests worldwide, with forests need to go beyond the provision of social- cultural and environmental services and enhance a * Corresponding author: Stefanie Albrecht, Doctoral student, their economic viability.
  • The Greifswalder Theory of Strong Sustainability and Its Relevance for Policy Advice in Germany and the EU

    The Greifswalder Theory of Strong Sustainability and Its Relevance for Policy Advice in Germany and the EU

    Sustainability Science – The Greifswalder Theory of Strong Sustainability and its relevance for policy advice in Germany and the EU Ralf Döring* , Barbara Muraca 1 *Johann Heinrich von Thünen - Federal Institute for Rural Areas, Forestry and Fisheries, Germany Abstract The Greifswald approach was developed over many years in the co-operation of environmental philosophers and ecological economists. The theory combines normative arguments on our responsibilities for current and future generations (intra- and intergenerational justice), the conceptual debate on weak vs. strong sustainability, a new concept for natural capital with practical applications in three sectors: fisheries, agriculture and climate change policy. It was developed as an answer to the increasingly vague understanding of the sustainability concept in the political arena, which gives politicians the possibility of subsuming under it all sorts of different programs and strategies. A sharper definition of the concept is needed that offers a non-arbitrary orientation ground for action to end the further loss of essential parts of natural capital without becoming too rigid and exclusive of differences. In this paper we give firstly a short overview about the philosophical background of the theory and about the conceptual debate on weak and strong sustainability. Secondly, we depict our concept of Natural Capital, which draws on Georgescu-Roegen’s systematic framework of fund, stock, services, and flows and focuses on a central characteristic of nature: its (re)productivity. Accordingly, natural capital consists of living funds, non-living funds, and stocks. This differentiation offers a helpful ground for identifying specific preservation goals for the different parts of natural capital and can be successfully employed in the advice for policy makers (as it has been the case with the German Advisory Council for the Environment over a decade).
  • Dec Issue # 76 What You Have Missed! MARINA BARRAGE’S 10TH ANNIVERSARY FINALE 26-28 Oct 2018

    Dec Issue # 76 What You Have Missed! MARINA BARRAGE’S 10TH ANNIVERSARY FINALE 26-28 Oct 2018

    Dec Issue # 76 What you have missed! MARINA BARRAGE’S 10TH ANNIVERSARY FINALE 26-28 Oct 2018 The end of October has held particular significance for PUB since 2008 – on 31 October 2008, the Marina Barrage was officially opened after decades of hard work and planning, realising former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew’s vision of a freshwater reservoir in the city. In celebration of this milestone, a 3-day carnival was held from 26-28 October, bringing people a slew of fun and excitement. There were over a hundred stalls for the shopaholics, foodies, and activities for families and even our environmentally-conscious friends! There were specially-curated foods reminiscent of the Barrage’s crest gates and gigantic pumps, both of which work to maintain consistent water levels in the Marina Reservoir and alleviate flooding in low-lying areas of the city. Free river cruises for the public to appreciate the efforts that go into keeping the reservoir waters clean beautiful. The Barrage came alive at night with twinkling fairy lights and the sounds of bustle, when shoppers did what they did best and sourced for their kicks. Many stalls boasted self-designed and handmade items, and the prices of the little trinkets sure were easy on the pocket! With 2018 designated as the year of Climate Action, and the Marina Barrage an icon of water security and sustainability, it only made sense that there be a Sustainable Zone at the Finale! Members of the public could sign up for activities and workshops to try their hand at upcycling everyday items into useful stuff, like milk cartons into coin pouches, and throwaway wallpaper samples into wallets! Image credit: Terra SG The highlight of the three days was when Deputy Prime Minister and Coordinating Minister for National Security, Mr Teo Chee Hean, graced the celebrations on 27 October.
  • Green Growth Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: the Alternative Solution for Achieving the Balance Between Both the Natural and the Economic System

    Green Growth Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: the Alternative Solution for Achieving the Balance Between Both the Natural and the Economic System

    sustainability Editorial Green Growth Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: The Alternative Solution for Achieving the Balance between Both the Natural and the Economic System Diego A. Vazquez-Brust 1,2 and José A. Plaza-Úbeda 3,* 1 Portsmouth Faculty of Business and Law, Richmond Building, Portland Street, Portsmouth P01 3DE, UK; [email protected] 2 Production Engineering Department, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis 88040-900, SC, Brazil 3 Economics and Business Department, University of Almeria, 04120 Almeria, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] 1. Introduction “We are ethically obliged and incited to think beyond what are treated as the realistic limits of the possible” (Judith Butler, 2020) The existence of an imbalance between our planet’s reserves of resources and the conditions necessary to maintain high levels of economic growth is evident [1]. The limitation of natural resources pushes companies to consider the possibility of facing critical situations in the future that will make it extremely difficult to reconcile economic Citation: Vazquez-Brust, D.A.; and sustainable objectives [2]. Plaza-Úbeda, J.A. Green Growth In this context of dependence on an environment with finite resources, there are Policy, De-Growth, and Sustainability: growing interests in alternative economic models, such as the Circular Economy, oriented to The Alternative Solution for the maximum efficient use of resources [3–5]. However, the Circular Economy approach is Achieving the Balance between Both still very far from the reality of industries, and the depletion of natural resources continues the Natural and the Economic System. undeterred [6]. It is increasingly necessary to explore alternative approaches to address the Sustainability 2021, 13, 4610.
  • Challenges for Integration of Sustainability Into Engineering Education

    Challenges for Integration of Sustainability Into Engineering Education

    AC 2012-4565: CHALLENGES FOR INTEGRATION OF SUSTAINABIL- ITY INTO ENGINEERING EDUCATION Dr. Qiong Zhang, University of South Florida Qiong Zhang is an Assistant Professor in civil and environmental engineering at the University of South Florida (USF). She received a Ph.D. in environmental engineering from Michigan Tech. Prior to joining the faculty at USF in 2009, she served as the Operations Manager of the Sustainable Future Institute at Michigan Tech. Dr. Linda Vanasupa, California Polytechnic State University Dr. James R. Mihelcic, University of South Florida James R. Mihelcic is a professor of civil and environmental engineering and state of Florida 21st Century World Class Scholar at the University of South Florida. He directs the Peace Corps master’s international program in civil and environmental engineering (http://cee.eng.usf.edu/peacecorps). Mihelcic is a Past President of the Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors (AEESP), a member of the EPA Science Advisory Board, and a board-certified member and Board Trustee of the American Academy of Environmental Engineers (AAEE). He is lead author for three textbooks: Fundamentals of Environmental Engineering (John Wiley & Sons, 1999); Field Guide in Environmental Engineering for Development Workers: Water, Sanitation, Indoor Air (ASCE Press, 2009); and, Environmental Engineer- ing: Fundamentals, Sustainability, Design (John Wiley & Sons, 2010). Dr. Julie Beth Zimmerman, Yale University Simona Platukyte, University of South Florida Page 25.294.1 Page c American Society for Engineering Education, 2012 Challenges for Integration of Sustainability into Engineering Education Abstract Due to the relative novelty of the subject of sustainability in the engineering community and its complexity, many challenges remain to successful integration of sustainability education in engineering.
  • “Degrowth”, Racial Inequality and Sustainability

    “Degrowth”, Racial Inequality and Sustainability

    Sustainability 2013, 5, 1282-1303; doi:10.3390/su5031282 OPEN ACCESS sustainability ISSN 2071-1050 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Essay The World is Yours: “Degrowth”, Racial Inequality and Sustainability Brian Gilmore College of Law, Michigan State University, 610 Abbott Road, East Lansing, MI 48823, USA; E-Mails: [email protected]; [email protected]; Tel.: +1-202-549-2277 Received: 30 October 2012; in revised form: 7 January 2013 / Accepted: 7 February 2013 / Published: 20 March 2013 Abstract: In French economist Serge Latouche’s 2009 book, Farewell to Growth, Latouche discusses “degrowth” in great detail, but he also explains how racial bias (and bias in general) in the world today has no place in a post-GDP world that embraces the principles outlined in “degrowth” or, as he calls it, décroissance. Latouche writes in Farewell to Growth that “we resist, and must resist all forms of racism and discrimination (skin color, sex, religion, ethnicity)”, biases he insist are “all too common in the West today.” Latouche’s ideas are important for considering “degrowth”, because racial bias and the historical problems presented by that bias, in the United States, continues despite efforts to address it in a significant manner. The World is Yours discusses “degrowth” , economic growth and racial inequality, seeking to not only provide a better understanding of the recent social, legal and political meaning of these terms, but also the difficulties presented by these ideas today in a world increasingly committed to economic growth, even at the expense of human existence. How can a new economic paradigm be pursued that is more sustainable? Will African-Americans and other groups of color and nations of color accept “degrowth” if the US begins to implement a real sustainable agenda that addresses racial inequality? Keywords: degrowth, racial inequality, wealth gap, sustainability, restorative justice 1.
  • A Menu for Change

    A Menu for Change

    A Menu for Change Using behavioural science to promote sustainable diets around the world The Behavioural Insights Team / A Menu for Change 2 The Behavioural Insights Team / A Menu for Change Toby Park, Head of Energy & Sustainability, The Behavioural Insights Team [email protected] Acknowledgements This report has benefitted from several individuals’ contributions. With particular thanks for substantive research support and contributions to early content and the structure of the report, to Emma Garnett (University of Cambridge) and Brittney Titus (University of Oxford), both supporting us while at placement at BIT. With thanks also to Elisabeth Costa (BIT), Dr Filippo Bianchi (BIT), Dr Jessica Barker (BIT), and Dr Christian Reynolds (University of Sheffield) for their valuable feedback and comments. This is a long report. We hope you’ll read it cover-to-cover, but if not, it’s written to allow you to dip into individual sections. Look out for the short orange descriptions at the beginning of each chapter to keep track of where you are. Sections 1.1-1.2 introduce the problem, and make the rationale for shifting global diets. This will be familiar ground for environmental scientists. Section 1.3 looks at the current state, and emerging trends, in diets around the world, and Section 1.4 highlights the many historical occasions when diets have radically changed through technological innovation or deliberate intervention from government and industry. Section 1.5 acknowledges the sensitivities of this topic, and offers some reflections on how we might navigate public and political consent. We don’t have all the answers here but give a series of recommendations for building public support and developing effective policy.
  • Restoring Streams in an Urbanizing World

    Restoring Streams in an Urbanizing World

    Freshwater Biology (2007) 52, 738–751 doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01718.x Restoring streams in an urbanizing world EMILY S. BERNHARDT* AND MARGARET A. PALMER† *Department of Biology, Duke University, Durham, NC, U.S.A. †Chesapeake Biological Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Solomons, MD, U.S.A. SUMMARY 1. The world’s population is increasingly urban, and streams and rivers, as the low lying points of the landscape, are especially sensitive to and profoundly impacted by the changes associated with urbanization and suburbanization of catchments. 2. River restoration is an increasingly popular management strategy for improving the physical and ecological conditions of degraded urban streams. In urban catchments, management activities as diverse as stormwater management, bank stabilisation, channel reconfiguration and riparian replanting may be described as river restoration projects. 3. Restoration in urban streams is both more expensive and more difficult than restoration in less densely populated catchments. High property values and finely subdivided land and dense human infrastructure (e.g. roads, sewer lines) limit the spatial extent of urban river restoration options, while stormwaters and the associated sediment and pollutant loads may limit the potential for restoration projects to reverse degradation. 4. To be effective, urban stream restoration efforts must be integrated within broader catchment management strategies. A key scientific and management challenge is to establish criteria for determining when the design options for urban river restoration are so constrained that a return towards reference or pre-urbanization conditions is not realistic or feasible and when river restoration presents a viable and effective strategy for improving the ecological condition of these degraded ecosystems.
  • The Sustainability of Waste Management Models in Circular Economies

    The Sustainability of Waste Management Models in Circular Economies

    sustainability Article The Sustainability of Waste Management Models in Circular Economies Carmen Avilés-Palacios 1 and Ana Rodríguez-Olalla 2,* 1 Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería de Montes, Forestal y del Medio Natural, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, c/José Antonio Novais 10, 28040 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] 2 Departamento Economía de la Empresa (ADO), Economía Aplicada II y Fundamentos Análisis Económico, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Paseo de los Artilleros s/n, Vicálvaro, 28032 Madrid, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-910671632 Abstract: The circular economy (CE) is considered a key economic model to meet the challenge of sustainable development. Strenous efforts are focused on the transformation of waste into resources that can be reintroduced into the economic system through proper management. In this way, the linear and waste-producing value chain problems are solved, making them circular, and more sustainable solutions are proposed in those chains already benefiting from circular processes, so that waste generation and waste are reduced on the one hand, and on the other, the non-efficient consumption of resources decreases. In the face of this current tide, there is another option that proposes a certain nuance, based on the premise that, although circular systems promote sustainability, it does not mean that they are in themselves sustainable, given that, in the first place, the effects of CE on sustainable development are not fully known and, on the other hand, the CE model includes the flow of materials, with only scant consideration of the flow of non-material resources (water, soil and energy).
  • Environmental Worldviews, Ethics, and Sustainability 25

    Environmental Worldviews, Ethics, and Sustainability 25

    Environmental Worldviews, Ethics, and Sustainability 25 Biosphere 2—A Lesson in Humility C O R E C A S E S TUDY In 1991, eight scientists (four men and four women) were sealed sphere’s 25 small animal species went extinct. Before the 2-year inside Biosphere 2, a $200 million glass and steel enclosure period was up, all plant-pollinating insects went extinct, thereby designed to be a self-sustaining life-support system (Figure 25-1) dooming to extinction most of the plant species. that would add to our understanding of Biosphere 1: the earth’s Despite many problems, the facility’s waste and wastewater life-support system. were recycled. With much hard work, the Biospherians were A sealed system of interconnected domes was built in the also able to produce 80% of their food supply, despite rampant desert near Tucson, Arizona (USA). It contained artificial ecosys- weed growths, spurred by higher CO2 levels, that crowded out tems including a tropical rain forest, savanna, and desert, as well food crops. However, they suffered from persistent hunger and as lakes, streams, freshwater and saltwater wetlands, and a mini- weight loss. ocean with a coral reef. In the end, an expenditure of $200 million failed to maintain Biosphere 2 was designed to mimic the earth’s natural chemi- this life-support system for eight people for 2 years. Since 2007, cal recycling systems. Water evaporated from its ocean and other the University of Arizona has been leasing the Biosphere 2 facility aquatic systems and then condensed to provide rainfall over the for biological research and to provide environmental education tropical rain forest.
  • Ecological Footprint & Sustainability

    Ecological Footprint & Sustainability

    E C O L O G I C A L F O O T P R I N T Ecological Footprint, Carbon Footprint, Biocapacity, & Overshoot ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT § compares total resources people consume with land & water area that is needed to replace those resources & absorb CO2 emissions § indicator of human pressure on nature § gives an estimate of area in hectares (acres or Earths) that is required for a human to live based on his or her lifestyle Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 2 Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 3 Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 4 Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 5 E C O L O G I C A L F O O T P R I N T § individual’s Ecological Footprint varies significantly depending on # of factors, § country of residence (government services) § quantity of goods & services they consume § resources used & waste generated to provide these goods and services Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 6 E C O L O G I C A L F O O T P R I N T Example: Driving a car requires built land for roads, parking & so on, as well as a large amount of forested 'energy' land to re-absorb the carbon emissions generated from petrol use. In addition, energy & materials are used for construction & maintenance of the vehicle. Ecological Footprint & Sustainability 7 R E D U C I N G F O O T P R I N T § Because of large area of land or sea needed to raise livestock & catch fish, eating less meat & fish could reduce your food footprint by up to 40%. § Individual who eats locally grown food reduces their overall Footprint by decreasing amount of energy needed to transport their food.