Convergence of ecological footprint and emergy analysis as a sustainability indicator of countries: Peru as case study

被引:230
|
作者
Siche, Raul [1 ]
Pereira, Lucas [2 ]
Agostinho, Feni [2 ]
Ortega, Enrique [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nacl Trujillo, Fac Ciencias Agropecuarias, Escuela Ingn Agroind, Trujillo, Peru
[2] Univ Estadual Campinas, UNICAMP, Food Eng Sch, Ecol Engn Lab, BR-13083862 Campinas, SP, Brazil
关键词
Emergy analysis; Ecological footprint; Sustainability indicators; Peru; NATIONS; EXERGY;
D O I
10.1016/j.cnsns.2009.10.027
中图分类号
O29 [应用数学];
学科分类号
070104 ;
摘要
In the last decade, two scientific tools have been extensively used worldwide to measure the human impact on nature: ecological footprint (EF) and emergy analysis (EA). Papers trying to combine the strong points of EF and EA, and obtain more accurate results have appeared in scientific literature, in which Zhao's et al. (2005) [61] approach is an important one. Unfortunately, some weak points of the original methods still remain on the new approaches proposed. The aim of this present work is to discuss some weak points found in Zhao's approach, trying to overcome them through a new approach called emergetic ecological footprint (EEF). The main difference between Zhao's approach and EEF is that the last one accounted for the internal storage of capital natural in the biocapacity calculation. Besides that, soil loss and water for human consume were considered as additional categories in the footprint calculation. After discussing it through comparisons with other approaches, EEF was used to assess Peru as a case study, resulting in a biocapacity of 51.76 gha capita(-1) and a footprint of 12.23 gha capita(-1), with 2004 data; that resulted in an ecological surplus of 39.53 gha capita(-1). The load capacity factor obtained was 4.23, meaning that Peru can support a population 4.23 times bigger considering the life style of 2004. The main limitations of the EEF are: (i) it is impossible to make comparisons between the biocapacity and footprint for each category; (ii) a need for a handbook with emergy intensity factors with good quality. On the other hand, the main positive points are: (i) its easiness of application in global and national scales; (ii) its final indicators account for all the previous energy (or emergy) used to make something; (iii) internal natural capital storage was accounted for in the biocapacity calculation, which can be a valid step towards the evaluation and assess of services provided by nature. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:3182 / 3192
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] The Ecological Footprint: an Indicator of Progress Toward Regional Sustainability
    Mathis Wackernagel
    J. David Yount
    Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 1998, 51 : 511 - 529
  • [12] An improved emergy ecological footprint method for ecological security assessment and quantitative analysis of influencing factors: a case study of Zhejiang Province
    Ma, Shuhua
    Xue, Minggao
    Ji, Siwen
    JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT, 2023, 66 (14) : 2878 - 2902
  • [13] The ecological footprint and the Andean countries, a reflection on sustainability and biocapacity
    Gomez, Deyanira
    LETRAS VERDES, 2009, (05): : 21 - 23
  • [14] Emergy and energy analysis as an integrative indicator of sustainability: A case study in semi-arid Canadian farmlands
    Fan, Jianling
    McConkey, Brian G.
    Janzen, H. Henry
    Miller, Perry R.
    JOURNAL OF CLEANER PRODUCTION, 2018, 172 : 428 - 437
  • [15] Convergence analysis of the ecological footprint: theory and empirical evidence from the USMCA countries
    Cem Işık
    Munir Ahmad
    Serdar Ongan
    Dilek Ozdemir
    Muhammad Irfan
    Rafael Alvarado
    Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2021, 28 : 32648 - 32659
  • [16] Convergence analysis of the ecological footprint: theory and empirical evidence from the USMCA countries
    Isik, Cem
    Ahmad, Munir
    Ongan, Serdar
    Ozdemir, Dilek
    Irfan, Muhammad
    Alvarado, Rafael
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2021, 28 (25) : 32648 - 32659
  • [17] Ecological footprint: an indicator of environmental sustainability of a surface coal mine
    Suranjan Sinha
    Surajit Chakraborty
    Shatrajit Goswami
    Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2017, 19 : 807 - 824
  • [18] Ecological footprint: an indicator of environmental sustainability of a surface coal mine
    Sinha, Suranjan
    Chakraborty, Surajit
    Goswami, Shatrajit
    ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 19 (03) : 807 - 824
  • [19] Evaluation on sustainability of water resource in karst area based on the emergy ecological footprint model and analysis of its driving factors: a case study of Guiyang city, China
    Liu, Zijie
    Li, Bo
    Chen, Mengyu
    Li, Tao
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH, 2021, 28 (35) : 49232 - 49243
  • [20] Evaluation on sustainability of water resource in karst area based on the emergy ecological footprint model and analysis of its driving factors: a case study of Guiyang city, China
    Zijie Liu
    Bo Li
    Mengyu Chen
    Tao Li
    Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 2021, 28 : 49232 - 49243