Skip to main content
Log in

Geographical distribution of ecological footprint and sustainability analysis for Liaoning Province

  • Research on Ecological Environment
  • Published:
Journal of Geographical Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents the detailed results and analyses on the ecological footprints and bio-capacities of the individual cities and the province as a whole for the year 2001, providing a clear picture of sustainability for the province. Results show that the ecological footprints of most cities in Liaoning exceeded their respective bio-capacities, incurring high ecological deficits. The ecological deficit of the province as a whole was 1.31 ha/cap. Those cities with resources extraction and/or primary material-making as their major industries constitute the “ecologically black band”, whose ecological deficits ranged from 2.45 to 5.23 ha/cap, the highest of all cities in the province. Fossil energy consumption was the major source of footprint amounting to 1.63 ha/cap at the provincial level, taking up 67.3% of the total. For cropland, modest ecological surpluses occurred in Jinzhou, Tieling, Huludao, and Panjin while modest ecological deficits in Dalian, Benxi, Fushun, and Dandong, resulting in an overall surplus for the province. Liaoning had a certain level of surplus in fishing ground (water area), mainly distributed in the coastal cities of Dalian, Panjin, Huludao, Yingkou, Jinzhou, and Dandong. Most cities had a small ecological deficit in pasture and all had a small ecological surplus in forest. The eco-efficiency, expressed as GDP value per hectare of footprint, exhibits high variations among the cities, with the highest (Shenyang) more than 10 times the lowest (Fuxin). Cities with manufacture, high-tech, and better developed service industries had high eco-efficiency, while those with resources extraction, primary material-making, and less developed service industries had low eco-efficiency. Based on the components and geographical distribution of ecological footprint, strategic policy implications are outlined for Liaoning’s development toward a sustainable future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Gernot Stoglehner, 2003. Ecological footprint: a tool for assessing sustainable energy supplies.Journal of Cleaner Production, 11: 267–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maged Senbel, Timothy McDaniels, Hadi Dowlatabadi, 2003. The ecological footprint: a non-monetary metric of human consumption applied to North America.Globed Environmental Change, 13: 83–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenzen M, Murray S A, 2001. A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia.Ecological Economics, 37: 229–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rees W E, 2003. Economic development and environmental protection: an ecological economics perspective.Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 86: 29–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tao Zai-Pu (Austria), 2003. Eco-Rucksack and Eco-Footprint. Beijing: Economic Science Press, 161–168. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Vuuren D P, Smeets E M W, 2000. Ecological footprints of Benin, Bhutan, Costa Rica and the Netherlands.Ecological Economics, 34: 115–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Vuuren, Smeets E, 2001. Ecological footprint: reply to A.R.B. Ferguson.Ecological Economics, 37: 1–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wackernagel M, Onisto L, Bello Pet al., 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, 4–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wackernagel M, Lewan L, Hansson C B, 1999. Evaluating the use of natural capital with the ecological footprint: application in Sweden and sub regions.Ambio, 28(7): 604–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang Shuhua, Wang Zhongjing, 2003. Value of the coordination to eco-economy in mountain district based on ecological footprint model.Journal of Mountain Research, 21(3): 324–330. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

  • World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Living Planet Report 2002. Avenue du Mont-Blanc CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland. Website: http//www.panda.org.

  • York R, Rosa E A, Dietz T, 2003. Footprint on the Earth: the environmental consequences of modernity.American Sociological Review, 68(2): 279–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu Zhongmin, Cheng Guodong, Zhang Zhiqianget al., 2003. The calculation and analysis of ecological footprints, diversity and development capacity of China.Journal of Geographical Sciences, 13(1): 19–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang Zhiqiang, Xu Zhongmin, Cheng Guodonget al., 2001. The ecological footprint of the 12 provinces of West China in 1999.Acta Geographica Sinica, 56(5): 599–609. (in Chinese)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Qing, W., Xiaowei, G., Jianxing, L. et al. Geographical distribution of ecological footprint and sustainability analysis for Liaoning Province. J. Geogr. Sci. 14, 303–312 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02837411

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02837411

Key words

Navigation