The Experts below are selected from a list of 15273 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sheng Zhao - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a modified method of Ecological Footprint calculation and its application
Ecological Modelling, 2005Co-Authors: Sheng ZhaoAbstract:Abstract As economic and Ecological support systems become more interdependent, new disciplines are needed to “bridge the gap” between human and nature. “Emergy” created by H.T. Odum is a new method for evaluating natural capital and ecosystem services. The “Ecological Footprint” created by Wackernagel and Rees has been promoted as a policy and planning tool for sustainability. The aim of this paper is to show a modified form of Ecological Footprint calculation by combining emergy analysis with conventional Ecological Footprint form of calculations. Our new method starts from the energy flows of a system in calculating Ecological Footprint and carrying capacity. Through a study of the energy flows, and using the method of emergy analysis, the energy flows of a system are translated into corresponding biological productive units. To demonstrate the mechanics of this new method, we compared our calculations with that of an original calculation of Ecological Footprint of a regional case. We select Gansu province in western China, as an example for application of our study. In this case the same conclusions were drawn using both methods: that Gansu province runs an Ecological deficit.
Alessandro Galli - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Ecological Footprint of mediterranean cities awareness creation and policy implications
Environmental Science & Policy, 2017Co-Authors: Wafaa Baabou, Nicole Grunewald, Claudiane Ouelletplamondon, Michel Gressot, Alessandro GalliAbstract:The Ecological Footprint is an accounting tool that has been used by resource managers and widely communicated to the public over the last 20 years. The National Footprint Accounts (NFA) are a system of national-level Ecological Footprint accounts that can be geographically scaled to derive Footprint values for major consumption categories at the household level for a given region, province, city or urban agglomeration. A number of city Footprint assessments have been undertaken during the last two decades. However, these studies have used different approaches, rendering comparability challenging. Here we present a top-down approach to consistently track the Ecological Footprint of 19 coastal cities in the Mediterranean region. Valletta, Athens, and Genoa are the cities with the highest per capita Ecological Footprint, ranging between 5.3 and 4.8 gha per person; Tirana, Alexandria and Antalya have the lowest Ecological Footprint, ranging between 2.1 and 2.7 gha per capita. Most cities’ Footprints exceed that of their countries with the exception of Thessaloniki, Tel Aviv, Venice, Palermo and Naples. This analysis provides a macro-level indication of the overall resource demands by cities, their drivers and leverage point. The main Footprint drivers are food consumption, transportation and consumption of manufactured goods. Differences among cities’ Ecological Footprint values are most likely driven by socio-economic factors, such as disposable income, infrastructure, and cultural habits. City level Footprint findings can be used to help design sustainability policies and positively reinforce collective public achievements so far.
-
Questioning the Ecological Footprint
Ecological Indicators, 2016Co-Authors: Alessandro Galli, David Lin, Mathis Wackernagel, Mario Giampietro, Steve Goldfinger, Elias Lazarus, Andrea Saltelli, Felix MüllerAbstract:Abstract In this perspective paper a critical discussion about the concept of the Ecological Footprint is documented based on 10 questions which are answered from critical and supporting points-of-view. These key questions are directed toward the underlying research objectives of the approach, a comparison with similar concepts, the quantification methodology and its accuracy, the characteristics of the observed flows, the role of scales and resolutions, the implementation of food security, the utility of the Ecological Footprint for society, the political relevance of the concept and the differences from other international indicator systems.
-
Ecological Footprint refining the carbon Footprint calculation
Ecological Indicators, 2016Co-Authors: Maria Serena Mancini, David Lin, Mathis Wackernagel, Valentina Niccolucci, Alessandro Galli, Simone Bastianoni, Nadia MarchettiniAbstract:Abstract Within the Ecological Footprint methodology, the carbon Footprint component is defined as the regenerative forest capacity required to sequester the anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions that is not absorbed by oceans. A key parameter of the carbon Footprint is the Average Forest Carbon Sequestration (AFCS), which is calculated from the net carbon sequestration capacity of forests ecosystems. The aim of this paper is to increase the clarity and transparency of the Ecological Footprint by reviewing the rationale and methodology behind the carbon Footprint component, and updating a key factor in its calculation, the AFCS. Multiple calculation options have been set to capture different rates of carbon sequestration depending on the degree of human management of three types of forest considered (primary forests, other naturally regenerated forests and planted forests). Carbon emissions related to forest wildfires and soil as well as harvested wood product have been included for the first time in this update of the AFCS calculation. Overall, a AFCS value range of 0.73 ± 0.37 t C ha −1 yr −1 has been identified. The resulting carbon Footprint and Ecological Footprint values have then been evaluated based on this value range. Results confirm that human demand for ecosystem services is beyond the biosphere's natural capacity to provide them.
-
Ecological Footprint implications for biodiversity
Biological Conservation, 2014Co-Authors: Alessandro Galli, Mathis Wackernagel, Katsunori Iha, Elias LazarusAbstract:Abstract In October 2010, world leaders gathered in Nagoya, Japan, for the CBD COP10 and agreed on the adoption of new biodiversity targets and new indicators for the period 2011–2020. This represents a positive development. But given the previous failure in achieving the 2010 biodiversity targets, new approaches to implementation as well as relevant measuring and monitoring systems are needed, for this renewed effort to have lasting success in preserving biodiversity. The need to adopt a comprehensive approach in monitoring biodiversity clearly emerged and it can be seen in the five strategic goals within which the 2020 Aichi Biodiversity targets are classified. Among them, is the strategic goal A, which aims to address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss by mainstreaming biodiversity across government and society. The aim of this paper is to describe the role of the Ecological Footprint in tracking human-induced pressures on biodiversity thus providing a synthesis of how the Ecological Footprint tool can contribute to the advancement of conservation science. Information is provided on the main features of the Footprint indicator and its dataset, the ongoing work to improve the methodology as well as the geographical (more than 150 countries covered) and temporal coverage (a period of almost five decades) of the Ecological Footprint accounting tool.
-
a research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts
Ecological Economics, 2009Co-Authors: Justin Kitzes, Alessandro Galli, John Barrett, Marco Bagliani, Gorm Dige, Sharon Ede, Karlheinz Erb, Stefan Giljum, Helmut Haberl, Chris HailsAbstract:Nation-level Ecological Footprint accounts are currently produced for more than 150 nations, with multiple calculations available for some nations. The data sets that result from these national assessments typically serve as the basis for Footprint calculations at smaller scales, including those for regions, cities, businesses, and individuals. Global Footprint Network's National Footprint Accounts, supported and used by more than 70 major organizations worldwide, contain the most widely used national accounting methodology today. The National Footprint Accounts calculations are undergoing continuous improvement as better data becomes available and new methodologies are developed. In this paper, a community of active Ecological Footprint practitioners and users propose key research priorities for improving national Ecological Footprint accounting. For each of the proposed improvements, we briefly review relevant literature, summarize the current state of debate, and suggest approaches for further development. The research agenda will serve as a reference for a large scale, international research program devoted to furthering the development of national Ecological Footprint accounting methodology.
Shauna A Murray - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a modified Ecological Footprint method and its application to australia
Ecological Economics, 2001Co-Authors: Manfred Lenzen, Shauna A MurrayAbstract:We present a new calculation of Australia's Ecological Footprint. Modifications have been made to the concept as originally proposed, in response to its perceived shortcomings: rather than characterising the consumption of the Australian population in terms of appropriated ‘bioproduction’ at world-average productivity, a regional, disturbance-based approach is taken, including actual Australian land use and emissions data. We consider greenhouse gases other than CO2 and emission sources other than energy use. We re-classify land use and introduce a weighting system to describe the degree of land disturbance. For our calculations, we employ a single-region, static, partially closed input–output framework. Australia's Ecological Footprint is determined based on actual land use as well as on land disturbance. We set up National Greenhouse Gas and Ecological Footprint Accounts distinguishing imports, domestic consumption, and exports. We investigate variations of the Ecological Footprint with demographic factors such as income, expenditure, size, and location of households, and draw some policy implications from our results. When determined based on actual land use on all types of land, Australia's Ecological Footprint is about 13.6 hectares per capita (ha/cap), which is considerably larger than results obtained in previous studies. After weighting, a land disturbance of 7.2 ha/cap is obtained. The per-capita Ecological Footprint shows a correlation with household expenditure, which can be described by an elasticity ηE=0.64. Furthermore, the per-capita Ecological Footprint decreases noticeably with household size.
Lin Fang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
a modified Ecological Footprint method to evaluate environmental impacts of industrial parks
Resources Conservation and Recycling, 2017Co-Authors: Yupeng Fan, Qi Qiao, Chaofan Xian, Yang Xiao, Lin FangAbstract:Abstract Industrial parks have been playing a crucial role on driving regional economic development, but also been exerting significant impacts on natural ecosystems due to intensive resource consumption and waste emission. Ecological Footprint method is a tool for analyzing the impact of human activities on environment, which has been applied in many fields. Most of the researches applying Ecological Footprint are conducted on large-scale objects, such as nation and globe. The Ecological Footprint analysis on the scale of the industrial park, however, is limited. This paper presents a modified Ecological Footprint accounting model, and applies it to appraise the environmental impact of an industrial park-Hefei economic and technological development area. Results show that the Ecological Footprint (8.87E+05 gha (global hectares)) far exceeds the Ecological capacity (4.82E+04 gha), meaning that the Ecological Footprint is 18.4 times of the Ecological capacity in the study park. In addition, the Ecological Footprint reduction caused by eco-industrial development in the study industrial park is quantified by Ecological Footprint model. The Ecological Footprint has been reduced by 15.9%, from 1.06E+06 gha to 8.87E+05 gha, which signifies an obvious environmental performance and economic benefits. Based on this study, the utilization of energy and material could be optimized in industrial park to reduce the influence of industrial activities on natural ecosystem. This paper provides a basis for an industrial park’s environmental management and decision making.
Da-qing Wang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Comparison of sustainable development status in Heilongjiang Province based on traditional Ecological Footprint method and emergy Ecological Footprint method
Journal of Applied Ecology, 2008Co-Authors: Chun-feng Chen, Hong-yan Wang, Du-ning Xiao, Da-qing WangAbstract:By using traditional Ecological Footprint method and its modification, emergy Ecological Footprint method, the sustainable development status of Heilongjiang Province in 2005 was analyzed. The results showed that the Ecological deficits of Heilongjiang Province in 2005 based on emergy and conventional Ecological Footprint methods were 1.919 and 0.6256 hm2 x cap(-1), respectively. The Ecological Footprint value based on the two methods both exceeded its carrying capacity, which indicated that the social and economic development of the study area was not sustainable. Emergy Ecological Footprint method was used to discuss the relationships between human's material demand and ecosystem resources supply, and more stable parameters such as emergy transformity and emergy density were introduced into emergy Ecological Footprint method, which overcame some of the shortcomings of conventional Ecological method.
