This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
Ecological Footprint accounting quantifies the supply and demand of Earth’s biocapacity. The National Footprint Accounts (NFA) are the most widely used Ecological Footprint (EF) dataset, and provide results for most countries and the world from 1961 to 2014, based primarily on publicly available UN datasets. Here, we review the evolution of the NFA, describe and quantify the effects of improvements that have been implemented into the accounts since the 2012 edition, and review the latest global trends. Comparing results over six editions of NFAs, we find that time-series trends in world results remain stable, and that the world Ecological Footprint for the latest common year (2008) has increased six percent after four major accounting improvements and more than thirty minor improvements. The latest results from the NFA 2018 Edition for the year 2014 indicate that humanity’s Ecological Footprint is 1.7 Earths, and that global ecological overshoot continues to grow. While improved management practices and increased agricultural yields have assisted in a steady increase of Earth’s biocapacity since 1961, humanity’s Ecological Footprint continues to increase at a faster pace than global biocapacity, particularly in Asia, where the total and per capita Ecological Footprint are increasing faster than all other regions.
David Lin; Laurel Hanscom; Adeline Murthy; Alessandro Galli; Mikel Evans; Evan Neill; Maria Serena Mancini; Jon Martindill; Fatime-Zahra Medouar; Shiyu Huang; Mathis Wackernagel. Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018. Resources 2018, 7, 58 .
AMA StyleDavid Lin, Laurel Hanscom, Adeline Murthy, Alessandro Galli, Mikel Evans, Evan Neill, Maria Serena Mancini, Jon Martindill, Fatime-Zahra Medouar, Shiyu Huang, Mathis Wackernagel. Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018. Resources. 2018; 7 (3):58.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDavid Lin; Laurel Hanscom; Adeline Murthy; Alessandro Galli; Mikel Evans; Evan Neill; Maria Serena Mancini; Jon Martindill; Fatime-Zahra Medouar; Shiyu Huang; Mathis Wackernagel. 2018. "Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018." Resources 7, no. 3: 58.
Over the past decade, Ecological Footprint has become one of the most popular and widespread indicators for sustainability assessment and resource management. However, its popularity has been coupled, especially in recent years, by the emergence of critical views on the indicator's rationale, methodology and policy usefulness. Most of these criticisms commonly point to the inability of the Ecological Footprint to track the human-induced depletion of natural capital stocks as one of the main shortcomings of the methodology. Fully addressing this issue will require research efforts and, most likely, further methodological refinements. The aim of this paper is therefore to outline the basis of a new area of investigation in Ecological Footprint research, primarily aimed at implementing the distinction between the use of stocks and the use of flows in Ecological Footprint Accounting and debating its implications
Maria Serena Mancini; Alessandro Galli; Valentina Niccolucci; David Lin; Laurel Hanscom; Mathis Wackernagel; Simone Bastianoni; Nadia Marchettini. Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for Ecological Footprint. Ecological Indicators 2017, 77, 123 -128.
AMA StyleMaria Serena Mancini, Alessandro Galli, Valentina Niccolucci, David Lin, Laurel Hanscom, Mathis Wackernagel, Simone Bastianoni, Nadia Marchettini. Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for Ecological Footprint. Ecological Indicators. 2017; 77 ():123-128.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMaria Serena Mancini; Alessandro Galli; Valentina Niccolucci; David Lin; Laurel Hanscom; Mathis Wackernagel; Simone Bastianoni; Nadia Marchettini. 2017. "Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for Ecological Footprint." Ecological Indicators 77, no. : 123-128.
Mathis Wackernagel; Gemma Cranston; Juan Carlos Morales; Alessandro Galli. Ecological Footprint accounts. Handbook of Sustainable Development 2014, 371 -396.
AMA StyleMathis Wackernagel, Gemma Cranston, Juan Carlos Morales, Alessandro Galli. Ecological Footprint accounts. Handbook of Sustainable Development. 2014; ():371-396.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMathis Wackernagel; Gemma Cranston; Juan Carlos Morales; Alessandro Galli. 2014. "Ecological Footprint accounts." Handbook of Sustainable Development , no. : 371-396.
In a world increasingly affected by global environmental changes, Low Income countries will play an ever more central role in determining the future health of the biosphere. While global use of the biosphere's capacity has increased over the past 45 years, per capita demand for biocapacity, as measured by the Ecological Footprint, has only increased in high-income countries and has remained constant or fallen in middle- and low-income nations. Consumption has increased faster than population in high-income nations, while population growth has been the dominant factor in middle- and low- income countries. Although listed in the middle-income group of countries, China showed atypical trends in the past 45 years, with a rapid increase in per capita Ecological Footprint that outstrip its gains in income. Typical trends were instead noticed for India, whose per person Ecological Footprint has fallen slightly. The results of this paper show that decisions made in China and India will be of fundamental importance for future global sustainability.
Alessandro Galli; Justin Kitzes; Valentina Niccolucci; Mathis Wackernagel; Yoshihiko Wada; Nadia Marchettini. Assessing the global environmental consequences of economic growth through the Ecological Footprint: A focus on China and India. Ecological Indicators 2012, 17, 99 -107.
AMA StyleAlessandro Galli, Justin Kitzes, Valentina Niccolucci, Mathis Wackernagel, Yoshihiko Wada, Nadia Marchettini. Assessing the global environmental consequences of economic growth through the Ecological Footprint: A focus on China and India. Ecological Indicators. 2012; 17 ():99-107.
Chicago/Turabian StyleAlessandro Galli; Justin Kitzes; Valentina Niccolucci; Mathis Wackernagel; Yoshihiko Wada; Nadia Marchettini. 2012. "Assessing the global environmental consequences of economic growth through the Ecological Footprint: A focus on China and India." Ecological Indicators 17, no. : 99-107.
Mathis Wackernagel. Methodological advancements in footprint analysis. Ecological Economics 2009, 68, 1925 -1927.
AMA StyleMathis Wackernagel. Methodological advancements in footprint analysis. Ecological Economics. 2009; 68 (7):1925-1927.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMathis Wackernagel. 2009. "Methodological advancements in footprint analysis." Ecological Economics 68, no. 7: 1925-1927.
Nations import and export biophysical resources. With many ecosystems worldwide under mounting stress, countries may be increasingly interested in knowing the extent and origin of their ecological imports and dependencies. In this paper the Ecological Footprint is used as a tool to measure the biophysical (as opposed to financial) value of international trade flows. This paper attempts to answer the following question: How large of an Ecological Footprint does a given country exert inside the borders of each of its trading partners? Records in the UN COMTRADE bilateral trade database are multiplied by a matrix of per-product Footprint yield coefficients to translate from values in dollars and tonnes to units of hectares. The results show that the largest interregional flows are from Latin to North America, and from North America to Asia-Pacific. Grouping countries by GDP, high and middle income countries appear in Footprint terms to trade predominantly with other high and middle income countries and much less with low income countries.
Daniel D. Moran; Mathis C. Wackernagel; Justin A. Kitzes; Benjamin W. Heumann; Doantam Phan; Steven H. Goldfinger. Trading spaces: Calculating embodied Ecological Footprints in international trade using a Product Land Use Matrix (PLUM). Ecological Economics 2009, 68, 1938 -1951.
AMA StyleDaniel D. Moran, Mathis C. Wackernagel, Justin A. Kitzes, Benjamin W. Heumann, Doantam Phan, Steven H. Goldfinger. Trading spaces: Calculating embodied Ecological Footprints in international trade using a Product Land Use Matrix (PLUM). Ecological Economics. 2009; 68 (7):1938-1951.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDaniel D. Moran; Mathis C. Wackernagel; Justin A. Kitzes; Benjamin W. Heumann; Doantam Phan; Steven H. Goldfinger. 2009. "Trading spaces: Calculating embodied Ecological Footprints in international trade using a Product Land Use Matrix (PLUM)." Ecological Economics 68, no. 7: 1938-1951.
Justin Kitzes; Daniel Moran; Alessandro Galli; Yoshihiko Wada; Mathis Wackernagel. Interpretation and application of the Ecological Footprint: A reply to Fiala (2008). Ecological Economics 2009, 68, 929 -930.
AMA StyleJustin Kitzes, Daniel Moran, Alessandro Galli, Yoshihiko Wada, Mathis Wackernagel. Interpretation and application of the Ecological Footprint: A reply to Fiala (2008). Ecological Economics. 2009; 68 (4):929-930.
Chicago/Turabian StyleJustin Kitzes; Daniel Moran; Alessandro Galli; Yoshihiko Wada; Mathis Wackernagel. 2009. "Interpretation and application of the Ecological Footprint: A reply to Fiala (2008)." Ecological Economics 68, no. 4: 929-930.
Sustainable development represents a commitment to advancing human well-being, with the added constraint that this development needs to take place within the ecological limits of the biosphere. Progress in both these dimensions of sustainable development can be assessed: we use the UN Human Development Index (HDI) as an indicator of development and the Ecological Footprint as an indicator of human demand on the biosphere. We argue that an HDI of no less than 0.8 and a per capita Ecological Footprint less than the globally available biocapacity per person represent minimum requirements for sustainable development that is globally replicable. Despite growing global adoption of sustainable development as an explicit policy goal, we find that in the year 2003 only one of the 93 countries surveyed met both of these minimum requirements. We also find an overall trend in high-income countries over the past twenty five years that improvements to HDI come with disproportionately larger increases in Ecological Footprint, showing a movement away from sustainability. Some lower-income countries, however, have achieved higher levels of development without a corresponding increase in per capita demand on ecosystem resources.
Daniel D. Moran; Mathis Wackernagel; Justin Kitzes; Steven H. Goldfinger; Aurélien Boutaud. Measuring sustainable development — Nation by nation. Ecological Economics 2008, 64, 470 -474.
AMA StyleDaniel D. Moran, Mathis Wackernagel, Justin Kitzes, Steven H. Goldfinger, Aurélien Boutaud. Measuring sustainable development — Nation by nation. Ecological Economics. 2008; 64 (3):470-474.
Chicago/Turabian StyleDaniel D. Moran; Mathis Wackernagel; Justin Kitzes; Steven H. Goldfinger; Aurélien Boutaud. 2008. "Measuring sustainable development — Nation by nation." Ecological Economics 64, no. 3: 470-474.