Refining the ecological footprint

Ecological footprint measures how much of the biosphere’s annual regenerative capacity is required to renew the natural resources used by a defined population in a given year. Ecological footprint analysis (EFA) compares the footprint with biocapacity. When a population’s footprint is greater than biocapacity it is reported to be engaging in ecological overshoot. Recent estimates show that humanity’s footprint exceeds Earth’s biocapacity by 23%. Despite increasing popularity of EFA, definitional, theoretical, and methodological issues hinder more widespread scientific acceptance and use in policy settings. Of particular concern is how EFA is defined and what it actually measures, exclusion of open oceans and less productive lands from biocapacity accounts, failure to allocate space for other species, use of agricultural productivity potential as the basis for equivalence factors (EQF), how the global carbon budget is allocated, and failure to capture unsustainable use of aquatic or terrestrial ecosystems. This article clarifies the definition of EFA and proposes several methodological and theoretical refinements. Our new approach includes the entire surface of the Earth in biocapacity, allocates space for other species, changes the basis of EQF to net primary productivity (NPP), reallocates the carbon budget, and reports carbon sequestration biocapacity. We apply the new approach to footprint accounts for 138 countries and compare our results with output from the standard model. We find humanity’s global footprint and ecological overshoot to be substantially greater, and suggest the new approach is an important step toward making EFA a more accurate and meaningful sustainability assessment tool.

Jason VenetoulisEmail: