Ecological-footprint 1 Ppt

8/3/2019 Ecological-footprint 1 Ppt

1/18

What Size Shoe Do You Wear?

Genuine Progress Index for Atlantic CanadaIndice de progrs vritable - Atlantique

October, 2002


2/18

Ecological Footprint

The amount of productive land and water a

given population requires to produce all the

resources they consume and take in all the

waste they make using prevailing technology(Onisto et al. 1998)

From a school perspective - EF = The space

required to support all the inputs and outputsof the school body.


3/18

Sustainability Model

We can calculate how much biological

productive area we have.

We can calculate how much we are using.

Living sustainable means that we are not living

beyond what is available.


4/18

Measurements of SustainableDevelopment

Generally look at the supply side of the

equation. Such measurements put the whole

onus for sustainable development on theproducer.

The ecological footprint looks at the

demand side of the equation and placesresponsibility for sustainable development not

only on the producer but on the consumer.


5/18

Components of the Ecological Footprint(six human activities that require space)

1. Growing Crops

2. Grazing Animals

3. Harvesting Timber

4. Catching Fish

5. Accommodating Infrastructure (housing,

transportation systems, industry, built up land)6. Absorbing Carbon Dioxide Emissions (burning fossil

fuels)


6/18

A regions (person, school) ecological footprintis the total area required to produce the food

and fibers that a region consumes, sustain its

energy consumption, and give space for its

infrastructure.

People consume resources from all over the

world, so their footprint can be thought of as

the sum of these areas, wherever they are onthe planet.


7/18

The Bottom Line

2.3 hectares of of biologically productive land

and sea per person

set aside 12% as recommended by the

Bruntland Commission to protect biodiversity

= 2.0 hectares per person


8/18

Global Context

United States9.7 ha/capita

Canada8.4 ha/capita

- NS - 8.1 ha/capita

- AB - 7.9 ha/capita

France5.3 ha/capita

Japan4.8 ha/capita

Zimbabwe1.3 ha/capita

Bangladesh0.5 ha/capita

Global Average: 2.3 hectares/capita


9/18

Ecological Footprint By Region (1996)

The size of each box is proportional to the aggregate footprint of each region.

The height of each box is propo rtional to the region's average ecological footprint per person; and

The width of the box is proportional to the population of the region.

(The OECD and non-OECD columns refer only to average ecological footprint per person).


10/18

Ecological FootprintNova Scotia and Canada, 1961-1999

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1960 197 0 1980 1990 2000

HectareperCa

pita

Nova Scotia

Canada

Linear (Nova Scotia)

Linear (Canada)


11/18

EF Applications

Region (country, province, town, university campus)

Personal Ecological Footprint (redefining progress,mountain equipment co-op)

Competing technologies (fuel cells)

Growing Techniques (field tomato vs. hydroponictomato)

Policy decisions (rail vs. road, urban planningdecisions)

Purchase decisions (cradle to grave)

Other (big mac, aquaculture, newspaper)


12/18

Ecological Footprint in Use

Teach concepts of sustainability,environmental issues, responsibility.

Benchmark of School Sustainability (define

current state, assess progress -- footprintincrease? Footprint decrease?)

Means of Comparison (between schools,

between grades, students vs. teachers) Promote holistic decision making


13/18

Messages Behind the EF

1. Not all Footprints are equal

Recap:

Average ecological space available per global

citizen = 2.0 ha/cap

Average N.S ecological footprint = 8.1 ha/cap


14/18

Countries such as the United States, Australia,

Canada, Singapore, New Zealand, Hong Kong,

and Sweden occupy footprints over 200%greater than the 2.0 ha available per global

citizen. This is dramatically contrasted to

Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Pakistan, India, and

Nigeria with footprints of 1 ha or less percapita.


15/18

The richest fifth:

account for 86% of total private consumption

expenditures, the poorest fifth 1.3%.

consume 45% of all meat and fish, the poorest fifth 5%

consume 58% of total energy, the poorest fifth less than

4%

consume 84% of all paper, the poorest fifth 1.1%

own 87% of the worlds vehicle fleet, the poorest fifth

less than 1% (UNDP, 1998).


16/18

In a world of limited resources and

limited waste assimilation capacity,

excess consumption by the rich literallyrequires that others live in poverty if we

are not to exceed the Earths physical

carrying capacity.

Ecological footprint analysis cuts

through the illusion that we can

improve the living standards of the poor

without curbing the excess consumption

of the rich.


17/18

Ecological Footprint by Quintile

6.2

6.6

7.0

8.1

10.7

8.1

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

1st Quintile 2nd Quintile 3rd Quintile 4th Quintile 5th quintile Average

Ha/Capita

Ecological Footprint


18/18

Websites:

GPI Atlanticwww.gpiatlantic.org (Nova Scotia Ecological Footprint)

Pembina Institutewww.pembina.org (Alberta Ecological Footprint)

Redefining Progress - www.rprogress.org (Foundation site of ecological footprint work)

WWF International - www.panda.org (Living Planet Report)

Litterature:

Lewan, Lillemor., Wackernagel, Mathis., and Carina Borgstrom Hansson, 1999. Evaluating The Use of

Natural Capital With Ecological Footprint: Applications In Sweden and Subregions. Ph.D. work.

Wackernagel, Mathis, and William E. Rees, 1996. Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the

Earth. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, BC. For details on the book, seewww.newsociety.com/oef.html .

Wackernagel, Mathis, Larry Onisto, Alejandro Callejas Linares, Ina Susana Lpez Falfn, Jesus Mndez

Garca, Ana Isabel Surez Guerrero, Ma. Guadalupe Surez Guerrero, 1997. Ecological Footprints of

Nations: How Much Nature Do They Use? How Much Nature Do They Have? Commissioned by the Earth

Council for the Rio+5 Forum. International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, Toronto.

Wackernagel, Mathis, 1998). "The Ecological Footprint of Santiago de Chile,"Local Environment, Vol 3,,

No. 2.

Wackernagel, Mathis., Onisto, Larry., Patricia Bello, Callejas Linares, A.,Ina, Lpez Falfn, I.S., Mndez

Garca, J., Surez Guerrero, A.I., and Surez Guerrero, M.G., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with

the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Vol. 29, pp. 375-390.
http://www.gpiatlantic.org/http://www.pembina.org/http://www.rprogress.org/http://www.panda.org/http://www.newsociety.com/oef.htmlhttp://www.newsociety.com/oef.htmlhttp://www.panda.org/http://www.rprogress.org/http://www.pembina.org/http://www.gpiatlantic.org/

Documents

Ecological-footprint 1 Ppt