Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for Ecological Footprint

Mancini, Maria Serena; Galli, Alessandro; Niccolucci, Valentina; Lin, David; Hanscom, Laurel; Wackernagel, Mathis; Bastianoni, Simone; Marchettini, Nadia

doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.01.033

Cited by 78 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This process led to a publication in 2009 by Kitzes et al [24]. Suggestions from this effort have largely guided the conceptual direction of the National Footprint Accounts, various of which have been documented and peer-reviewed [16,[36][37][38][39][40][41]. Major methodological improvements between the 2010 and 2011 NFA editions were implemented based on these suggestions, including: (1) introducing the 'constant global hectares' metric to account for changing values of a global hectare over time; (2) updating ocean CO 2 uptake values to account for changes in the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere over time; and (3) a new data-cleaning algorithm to reduce inconsistencies in the source data of commodity trade [16].…”

Section: Previous Nfa Updatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018

Lin¹,

Hanscom²,

Murthy³

et al. 2018

Resources

Self Cite

291

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological Footprint accounting quantifies the supply and demand of Earth’s biocapacity. The National Footprint Accounts (NFA) are the most widely used Ecological Footprint (EF) dataset, and provide results for most countries and the world from 1961 to 2014, based primarily on publicly available UN datasets. Here, we review the evolution of the NFA, describe and quantify the effects of improvements that have been implemented into the accounts since the 2012 edition, and review the latest global trends. Comparing results over six editions of NFAs, we find that time-series trends in world results remain stable, and that the world Ecological Footprint for the latest common year (2008) has increased six percent after four major accounting improvements and more than thirty minor improvements. The latest results from the NFA 2018 Edition for the year 2014 indicate that humanity’s Ecological Footprint is 1.7 Earths, and that global ecological overshoot continues to grow. While improved management practices and increased agricultural yields have assisted in a steady increase of Earth’s biocapacity since 1961, humanity’s Ecological Footprint continues to increase at a faster pace than global biocapacity, particularly in Asia, where the total and per capita Ecological Footprint are increasing faster than all other regions.

show abstract

Section: Previous Nfa Updatesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018

Lin¹,

Hanscom²,

Murthy³

et al. 2018

Resources

Self Cite

291

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings not only are of real significance in promoting the coordinated development between economy and natural capital utilization in Ningxia Province but also have policy implications in improving the utilization efficiency of natural capital in energy-rich ecologically fragile regions.Sustainability 2020, 12, 562 2 of 16 environmental quality reduction, and occupation of space have reached an unprecedented scale [3,4]. Under the current severe resource and environmental problems, natural capital has become a limiting and irreplaceable factor that affects human welfare and regional sustainable development [5,6]. At present, eco-economics has developed a consensus that the minimum level of sustainable development is preventing the stock of natural capital from decreasing [7,8], and the development of low-carbon economy has become an inevitable choice for China and the whole world to achieve sustainable development.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the traditionally two-dimensional ecological footprint only involves the important role of forest carbon sink, regardless of the function of other land use types. Additionally, it fails to track the human-induced depletion of natural capital stocks [5] owing to the lack of corresponding indicators to explain its overload degree.In order to solve this problem, Niccolucci et al[20] established the three-dimensional ecological footprint model (3D EF model), introducing ecological footprint depth (EF depth) and ecological footprint size (EF size) indexes to characterize the level of natural capital stocks and flows. The former refers to the natural capital amount existing in physical form in a geographical space at any particular time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Natural Capital Evolution and Driving Forces in Energy-Rich and Ecologically Fragile Regions: A Case Study of Ningxia Province, China

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ningxia Province is rich in energy but fragile in ecology. How to coordinate sustainable utilization of natural capital and the fragile ecological environment is a significant guarantee for social-economic development. This study uses the improved three-dimensional ecological footprint to characterize the utilization status of natural capital flows and stocks in Ningxia Province from 2004 to 2017. Additionally, the driving factors behind changes in the natural capital stock are revealed by the partial least squares method (PLS). The results are as follows: (1) From 2004 to 2017, ecological footprint increased rapidly in Ningxia Province at an annual rate of 4.52%, resulting in a increase of the ecological deficit from 1.64 to 3.85 gha/cap at an annual rate of 6.8%, among which, Yinchuan city and Shizuishan city had the largest ecological deficit, while Guyuan city basically maintained ecological surplus. The fossil energy land and cropland were the main components of ecological footprint. (2) The consumption of capital stock in Ningxia Province continued to grow at an annual rate of 3.12%, from a value of 2.28 times overusing the existing area in 2004, increasing to 3.41 times in 2017. While the EF size increased slightly with an annual rate of 1.95%. The capital stock consumption was concentrated in Yinchuan and Shizuishan, and the capital flow consumption was concentrated in Wuzhong, Guyuan, and Zhongwei. (3) The capital flows of forest land and built-up land basically meet consumption demand, while the capital stock occupation of grassland, water and fossil energy land was serious. By 2017, the capital flow of cropland could basically satisfy people’s consumption demand. (4) The urbanization rate, GDP, the secondary industry output value and per capita consumption expenditure of urban residents were the main influence factors on the natural capital stock consumption. These findings not only are of real significance in promoting the coordinated development between economy and natural capital utilization in Ningxia Province but also have policy implications in improving the utilization efficiency of natural capital in energy-rich ecologically fragile regions.

show abstract

“…Currently, the SANC generally relies on various EF methods [14][15][16][17]. These methods can clearly quantify human occupation and the supply of natural capital, which are more operative and less subjective for the SANC.The EF model is a mature approach for quantitatively measuring the effect of human occupation on natural capital, and has been applied at various scales, including national parks and other types of protected areas [18][19][20], and has been combined with 3S technology [13], the coefficient matrix method [21], time series analysis, and other technical methods [22][23][24]. The 3D ecological footprint (EF 3D ) model overcomes the shortcomings of the traditional EF model, which exclusively focuses on flow capital and overlooks the significance of stock capital in sustainable development.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability Assessment of Natural Capital Based on the 3D Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study of the Shennongjia National Park Pilot

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sustainability assessment of natural capital (SANC) is one of the key elements in the field of national park protection. Assessing the impact of socioeconomic development on the Shennongjia National Park Pilot (SNPP), a typical national park in China, would be extremely conducive to the sustainable management of its natural capital. To this end, a natural capital account system encompassing transportation, accommodation, food, and waste for both locals and tourists was developed. Throughout the period from 2007 to 2016, a SANC was conducted in SNPP based on the 3D ecological footprint (EF 3D ) model to measure stock consumption as well as flow occupancy. The main conclusions were as follows: First, the ecological footprint (EF) size of the SNPP increased yearly from 2007 to 2014, although it decreased in 2015, when the government started preparing for the SNPP. Second, rapid tourism-related developments brought about an increase in the EF of built-up land, and the increasing medicinal planting also enlarged the EF of arable land. Third, the cumulative EF of tourism was 2.82 times that of locals over the past decade. This gap has been expanding. Overall, the results show relatively steady sustainability in terms of natural capital in the SNPP. More precisely, the preceding stock consumption did not severely constrain the function of the current regeneration of flow capital, whereas tourism and planting have become potential threats to the sustainability of the natural capital.Sustainability 2019, 11, 956 2 of 17 destruction of animal habitats due to the results of recreational activities, such as garbage, local natural resource consumption by agricultural production [2], reduced national park space due to hotels and recreation trails [3], and soil erosion caused by traffic [4]. Unsustainable natural capital utilization is causing natural capital to be an increasingly limiting factor for human well-being in the Anthropocene era [5,6].Natural capital, the most fundamental of the forms of capital, sets the ecological limits for our socioeconomic systems [7]. Environment and development economics theory states that maintaining natural capital is the corner-stone of sustainable development [8]. However, the significance of natural capital used to be overlooked when making decisions. Consequently, the sustainability assessment of natural capital (SANC) provides insights into designing environmental policy and sustainable development planning. At present, the SANC does not have a mature evaluation system that can directly interface with economic development. Hence, studies on natural capital mainly adopt ecological footprint (EF) [9], ecosystem service valuation [10], energy theory [11], net primary productivity [12], life cycle assessment [13], etc. Currently, the SANC generally relies on various EF methods [14][15][16][17]. These methods can clearly quantify human occupation and the supply of natural capital, which are more operative and less subjective for the SANC.The EF model is a mature approach for quantitativ...

show abstract

Stocks and flows of natural capital: Implications for Ecological Footprint

Cited by 78 publications

References 32 publications

Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018

Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018

Natural Capital Evolution and Driving Forces in Energy-Rich and Ecologically Fragile Regions: A Case Study of Ningxia Province, China

Sustainability Assessment of Natural Capital Based on the 3D Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study of the Shennongjia National Park Pilot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About