Search

We define regional sustainability as the continuous support of humanquality of life within a region's ecological carrying capacity. To achieve regional sustainability, one must first assess the current situation. That is, indicators of status and progress are required. The ecological footprint is an area-based indicator which quantifies the intensity of human resource use and waste discharge activity in relation to a region's ecological carrying capacity. If the ecological footprint of a human population is greater than the area which it occupies, the population must be doing at least one of the following: receiving resources from elsewhere, disposing of some of its waste outsideof the area, or depleting the area's natural capital stocks. To achieve global sustainability, the sum of all regional footprints must not exceed the total area of the biosphere. This paper explains the mechanics of a footprint calculation method for nations and regions. As the method is standardized, the relative ecological load imposed by nations and regions can be compared. Further, a nation's or region's consumption can be contrasted with its local ecological production, providing an indicator of potential vulnerability and contribution to ecological decline. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ecological Footprint and biocapacity accounting is a widely-used ecological accounting framework which tracks human demand against the biosphere's rate of regeneration. However, current national assessments do not yet include carbon-dense peatlands, hindering the evaluation of peatland biocapacity contributions. Also, the economic efficiency of peatland restoration is understudied and needed to inform land use decisions. We provide the first assessment of Scotland's biocapacity and add peatlands as a novel land type. We then project the biocapacity impacts in 2050 of current peatland restoration targets and various alternative management scenarios. Finally, we estimate the cost per tonne of greenhouse gas abated of various peatland restoration scenarios, and compare this with estimates of afforestation mitigation costs from the literature. Our results show that Scotland's per-person biocapacity exceeds the UK average by a factor of three. However, despite covering 25% of land area, peatland biocapacity increases Scotland's biocapacity total by only 2%, while the Carbon Footprint of degraded peatlands increases Scotland's ecological deficit by 40%. Current peatland restoration targets of the Scottish Government are estimated to reduce the national ecological deficit by only 9% in 2050. The cost-effectiveness of peatland restoration is context-dependent, and extremely cost-effective methods are applicable to peatland areas far exceeding current government restoration targets. Our findings provide land managers with evidence in favour of increased peatland restoration, both in terms of boosting biocapacity, and economic cost-effectiveness., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Environmental challenges to natural resources have been attributed to human behavior and traditional agricultural production techniques. Natural resource degradation in agriculture has always been a prime concern in agro ecological research and sustainability analysis. There are many techniques for assessing environmental performance; one of which, ecological footprint (EF), assesses human pressure on the environment and natural resources. The main purpose of this study was calculation of ecological indices including biocapacity (BC) and EF of rural areas of Fars province of Iran. The study was accomplished using survey and structured interviews consisting of three main questionnaires in two different steps. Different agricultural stakeholders, including farmers (for the first step) as well as the policymakers, extension managers and authorities (for the second step) were interviewed. Based on multi-stage stratified random sampling, 50 villages and 423 farmers were selected. Face validity and reliability of the questionnaires were assessed by a panel of specialists as well as conducting a pilot study, respectively. The paradigmatic perspectives of agricultural policy makers and managers (22 individuals) were also analyzed using another specific questionnaire by Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Findings revealed that most of the studied villages faced a critical environmental condition due to the results of ecological indicator which was calculated in the study. According to the four main components of human ecology (POET model) including Population, Organization, Environment and Technology, village groups that differed in terms of sustainability level also showed significantly differences due to population, social participation, use of green technologies and attitude towards diverse environmental management paradigms. The causal model also revealed that population, green technology, social participation and attitude toward frontier economics, which were in accordance with the elements of human ecology model, were the main factors affecting the ecological index. Finally, AHP results determined the dominant economic perspectives of agricultural authorities. A paradigm shift toward the comprehensive paradigm of eco-development plus consideration of the results of the ecological indicator calculation as the base of agricultural planning at the local level were recommended., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Human beings are not only a part of our planet's ecosystems, but also, they are massively overusing them. This makes ecosystem protection, including biodiversity preservation, vital for humanity's future. The speed and scale of the threat are unprecedented in human history. The long arch of evolution has been confronted with such a high level of human impact, that we are now facing the sixth mass extinction event, 66 million years after the last one. This threat heightens the imperative for bold human intervention. Our paper identifies three strategies for such an intervention. First, and possibly most challenging, human demand needs to be curbed so it fits within the bounds of what Earth's ecosystems can renew. Without meeting this quantitative goal, biodiversity preservation efforts will not be able to get scaled. Second, in the transition time, we must focus on those locations and areas where most biodiversity is concentrated. Such a focus on 'hotspots' will help safeguard the largest portion of biodiversity with least effort. Third, to direct biodiversity preservation strategies, we need to much better document the existence and distribution of biodiversity around the globe. New information technologies could help with this critical effort. In conclusion, biodiversity preservation is no longer just a concern for specialized biologist but is becoming a societal necessity if humanity wants to have a stable future., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (© 2020 Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.)

Competing Interests: We have an interest in this issue because we are the developers of Ecological Footprint accounting, which is being criticized in the manuscript to which Dr. Rees was invited to respond.

Sustainability is the possibility of all people living rewarding lives within the means of nature. Despite ample recognition of the importance of achieving sustainable development, exemplified by the Rio Declaration of 1992 and the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, the global economy fails to meet the most fundamental minimum condition for sustainability--that human demand for ecosystem goods and services remains within the biosphere's total capacity. In 2002, humanity operated in a state of overshoot, demanding over 20% more biological capacity than the Earth's ecosystems could regenerate in that year. Using the Ecological Footprint as an accounting tool, we propose and discuss three possible global scenarios for the future of human demand and ecosystem supply. Bringing humanity out of overshoot and onto a potentially sustainable path will require managing the consumption of food, fibre and energy, and maintaining or increasing the productivity of natural and agricultural ecosystems.

Sustainability requires living within the regenerative capacity of the biosphere. In an attempt to measure the extent to which humanity satisfies this requirement, we use existing data to translate human demand on the environment into the area required for the production of food and other goods, together with the absorption of wastes. Our accounts indicate that human demand may well have exceeded the biosphere's regenerative capacity since the 1980s. According to this preliminary and exploratory assessment, humanity's load corresponded to 70% of the capacity of the global biosphere in 1961, and grew to 120% in 1999.