Abstract
Timofeev-Resovsky’s trick question—The ecological footprint as a quantitative value of anthropogenic pressure—Ecological footprint and the one planet concept—“Eco-creditor” countries and “eco-debtor” countries—Urbanization and a growing ecological footprint—The megalopolis to decide humanity’s fate.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Of course, many of the parameters used to weigh out anthropogenic influence on the environment have been somewhat arbitrarily determined by the calculator designers, which has often served as a point of criticism for the concept of an ecological footprint. Also, they do not count the way many forms of impact reinforce each other, often in non-linear ways, such as when the effect increases faster than the cause. We certainly cannot take literally the number of planets that correspond to the global ecological footprint. This is, most likely, an attempt to express the situation qualitatively. However, any first attempt to assign quantitative value to that which had never been assigned value before will always give rise to such criticism.
- 2.
The WWF Living Planet Report has been published since 1998, and now comes out every 2 years. It is considered one of the most authoritative sources of information on the Earth’s ecological status. The report is developed by scientists from the London Zoological Society and the Global Footprint Network.
- 3.
Here we’d like to draw attention to conceptual connection between an ecological footprint and the (ecological) carrying capacity of the biosphere (which will be discussed in detail in Chap. 14). In both cases, it is a question of what anthropogenic load the biosphere is in condition to bear while maintaining a fully productive environment. Attempts to estimate the biosphere’s carrying capacity have been undertaken based on analysis of energy usage by the insular human technosphere compared with that of biota as a whole (Gorshkov 1980, 1995) or the biomass used by humans (Vitousek et al. 1986). These works, like the concept of a global ecological footprint, are based on hypothetical presuppositions and cannot be regarded as totally well-founded. According to these estimates, anthropogenic impact on the biosphere surpassed its carrying capacity at the turn of the nineteenth-twentieth century, and by the end of the twentieth century, it stood about ten times higher. Then how does the biosphere still exist? Answers to the question are based on a distinction between ecological crisis and ecological disaster. When the anthropogenic load exceeds the biosphere’s capacity, it leads to a state of ecological crisis. Up to a certain moment—the point of no return—it maintains the ability to regenerate. Going beyond this point means the irreversible destruction of the biosphere: ecological disaster. The reader should note the similarity to the banking analogy used by the creators of the ecological footprint concept to explain the apparent paradox.
- 4.
Counting countries with populations of over one million people for which we have reliable statistical data.
- 5.
Here let us introduce a few examples of water conservation for domestic and workplace settings often found in ecological literature. Use different quality water for different purposes (such as rain or drainage water for flushing toilets and watering the lawn). Install a screw-on regulator on your tap to stabilize flow. Fix leaks, which cause the U.S., for example, to lose a fourth of the water flowing through its pipes. Introduce water purification and recycling to industry. Install a water usage meter, which reduces expenditure of water by 30–40% (Hawken et al. 1999).
References
Dodman, D. (2009). Urban density and climate change. In J. M. Guzmán, et al., (Ed.), Analytical review of the interaction between urban growth trends and environmental changes (Revised draft: April 2, 2009). New York: United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).
Galli, A., Kitzes, J., Wermer, P., Wackernagel, M., Niccolucci, V., & Tiezzi, E. (2007). An exploration of the mathematics behind the ecological footprint. International Journal of Ecodynamics, 2(4), 250–257.
Gorshkov, V. G. (1980). The Structure of Biospheric Energy Flux. Botanichesky zhurnal, 65(11), 1579–1590. [in Russian].
Gorshkov, V. G. (1995). Physical and Biological Bases for Sustainable Life. Moscow: VINITI [in Russian].
Hawken, P., Lovins A., Lovins, H. (1999). Natural Capital. New York: Little, Brown, and Co. (Chap. 11).
Hubacek, K., Guan, D., Barrett, J., & Wiedmann, T. (2009). Environmental implications of urbanization and lifestyle change in China: Ecological and water footprints. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17, 1241–1248.
Lenton, T., Footitt, A., & Dlugolecki, A. (2009). Major tipping points in the Earth’s climate system and consequences for the insurance sector. Berlin, Munich: WWF and Allianz.
Lewis, S. L., Brando, P. M., Phillips, O. L., van der Heijden, G. M., & Nepstad, D. (2011). The 2010 Amazon drought. Science, 331(6017), 554.
Maksakovsky, V. P. (2008). A geographical portrait of the world (in two books). Moscow: DROFA [in Russian]. Book 1. Retrieved from http://www.twirpx.com/file/997779/. Book 2. Retrieved from http://www.twirpx.com/file/997899/
Moiseiev, N. N. (2002). How far off is tomorrow? Moscow: Taydeks Ko. [in Russian].
Oak Ridge National Laboratory. (2011). Carbon dioxide emissions rebound quickly after global financial crisis. Tennessee, USA.
UNFPA. (2007). State of world population 2007: Unleashing the potential of urban growth. New York: UN Population Fund.
Vitousek, P. M., Ehrlich, P. R., Ehrlich, A. H. E., & Matson, P. A. (1986). Human appropriation of the product of photosynthesis. Bioscience, 36(5), 368–375.
WWF. (2010). Reinventing the city: Three perquisites for greening urban infrastructures. Gland: WWF International.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Danilov-Danil’yan, V.I., Reyf, I.E. (2018). The Ecological Footprint of Modern Man. In: The Biosphere and Civilization: In the Throes of a Global Crisis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67193-2_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67193-2_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67192-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-67193-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)