Towards a 3D National Ecological Footprint Geography

In the last decades several indicators have been proposed to guide decision makers and help manage natural capital. Among such indicators is the Ecological Footprint, a resource accounting tool with a biophysical and thermodynamic basis. In our recent paper (Niccolucci et al., 2009), a three dimensional Ecological Footprint (^3DEF) model was proposed to better explain the difference between human demand for natural capital stocks and resource flows. Such ^3DEF model has two relevant dimensions: the surface area (or Footprint size - EF_size) and the height (or Footprint depth - EF_depth). EF_size accounts for the human appropriation of the annual income from natural capital while EF_depth accounts for the depletion of stocks of natural capital and/or the accumulation of stocks of wastes. Building on the 2009 Edition of the National Footprint Accounts (NFA), global trends (from 1961 to 2006) for both EF_size and EF_depth were analyzed. EF_size doubled from 1961 to 1986; after 1986 it reached an asymptotic value equal to the Earth's biocapacity (BC) and remained constant. Conversely, EF_depth remained constant at the “natural depth” value until 1986, the year in which global EF first exceeded Earth's BC. A growing trend was observed after that. Trends in each Footprint land type were also analyzed to better appraise the land type under the higher human induced stress. The usefulness of adopting such ^3DEF model in the National Footprint Accounts was also discussed. In comparing any nation's demand for ecological assets with its own biocapacity in a given year, four hypothetical cases were identified which could serve as the basis for a new Footprint geography based on both size and depth concepts. This ^3DEF model could help distinguish between the use of natural capital flows and the depletion of natural capital stocks while maintaining the structure and advantages of the classical Ecological Footprint formulation.