RELATED SEARCHES
Sponsored Ecological Footprint Results:
Ecological Footprint: Ecology, Analysis, Sustainability, Human Population And Natural Resources
By:
Published: October 26, 2007
"Ecological footprint" has become an increasingly common buzz word when discussing the subject of climate change. The term itself is commonly used in reference to the impact of the human species on the planet, and that's mostly correct. Technically, ecological footprint is a form of analysis, one of the most recent developments in the science of Ecology.
The ecological footprint calculates the rate at which the human population consumes the Earth's natural resources. The goal, obviously, is sustainability, but thus far, humanity has shown difficulty living within its means.
None of the current estimates of our ecological footprint are good; the most recent WWF Living Planet Report declared that the human population was consuming natural resources 23% faster than the planet could replenish them. The largest ecological footprint was held by industrialized nations like the United States and the United Kingdom. It is important to know that ecological footprint analysis can be done at a city level as well, and that much variation exists within each country. Unfortunately, even the better cities in a country like the UK are living well outside of their means; it is a question of whether two additional planets or three additional planets would be needed to keep the pace. The eventual consequences of such a running debt are warned to be catastrophic in the latter half of the 21st century.
The real difficulty in reducing the ecological footprint is that sustainability must also preserve a high standard of living, and the allure of materialism in the industrialized world makes that extremely difficult. Carbon dioxide emissions are the largest and most damaging portion of our current ecological footprint, and most current attention is focused on that area. Yet other concerns remain even if fossil fuels are taken out of the equation; the collective drain of modern appliances, cell phones and household energy usage are still taxing natural resources at an unhealthy rate. The onslaught of technology is not going to slow down, so new innovations will be needed if the ecological footprint is to be reduced.
Perhaps one of the biggest problems of modern society is that the cities have lost their connection to the world of ecology; the places most affected by the human population, like rainforests, are the places the human population sees the least. By the time the damaging ecological footprint starts severely affecting the cities, it will be too late to avert catastrophic consequences. The current analysis suggests that cities will have the largest effect on whether sustainability can be achieved. It is most important to remember that consequences like climate change and vanishing groundwater are not inevitable. It will take a sea change in human habits to change our ecological footprint, but such a radical shift may be essential to preserving the only habitat we know of. The ecological footprint will not be reduced overnight; it will take effort at both the personal and the governmental level, and will take upwards of a hundred years to truly be felt. Nevertheless, it is a challenge that must be met for the sake of future generations.
Sources:
"Ecological Footprint: Overview." Global Footprint Network. 17 Oct. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?conten t=footprint_overview.
"Global Ecosystems 'Face Collapse.'" BBC News. 24 Oct. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6077798. stm.
"Living Planet Report 2006 Outlines Scenarios for Humanity's Future." Global Footprint Network. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/newsletters/gfn_bl ast_0610.html.
Smith, Lewis. "Greenest of Cities Still Costing the Earth." The Times. 23 Oct. 2007. Times Newspapers. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article27 19551.ece.
Related Articles
None of the current estimates of our ecological footprint are good; the most recent WWF Living Planet Report declared that the human population was consuming natural resources 23% faster than the planet could replenish them. The largest ecological footprint was held by industrialized nations like the United States and the United Kingdom. It is important to know that ecological footprint analysis can be done at a city level as well, and that much variation exists within each country. Unfortunately, even the better cities in a country like the UK are living well outside of their means; it is a question of whether two additional planets or three additional planets would be needed to keep the pace. The eventual consequences of such a running debt are warned to be catastrophic in the latter half of the 21st century.
The real difficulty in reducing the ecological footprint is that sustainability must also preserve a high standard of living, and the allure of materialism in the industrialized world makes that extremely difficult. Carbon dioxide emissions are the largest and most damaging portion of our current ecological footprint, and most current attention is focused on that area. Yet other concerns remain even if fossil fuels are taken out of the equation; the collective drain of modern appliances, cell phones and household energy usage are still taxing natural resources at an unhealthy rate. The onslaught of technology is not going to slow down, so new innovations will be needed if the ecological footprint is to be reduced.
Perhaps one of the biggest problems of modern society is that the cities have lost their connection to the world of ecology; the places most affected by the human population, like rainforests, are the places the human population sees the least. By the time the damaging ecological footprint starts severely affecting the cities, it will be too late to avert catastrophic consequences. The current analysis suggests that cities will have the largest effect on whether sustainability can be achieved. It is most important to remember that consequences like climate change and vanishing groundwater are not inevitable. It will take a sea change in human habits to change our ecological footprint, but such a radical shift may be essential to preserving the only habitat we know of. The ecological footprint will not be reduced overnight; it will take effort at both the personal and the governmental level, and will take upwards of a hundred years to truly be felt. Nevertheless, it is a challenge that must be met for the sake of future generations.
Sources:
"Ecological Footprint: Overview." Global Footprint Network. 17 Oct. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?conten t=footprint_overview.
"Global Ecosystems 'Face Collapse.'" BBC News. 24 Oct. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6077798. stm.
"Living Planet Report 2006 Outlines Scenarios for Humanity's Future." Global Footprint Network. 2006. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.footprintnetwork.org/newsletters/gfn_bl ast_0610.html.
Smith, Lewis. "Greenest of Cities Still Costing the Earth." The Times. 23 Oct. 2007. Times Newspapers. 26 Oct. 2007. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article27 19551.ece.
Featured Ecological Footprint Products:
