Eco-footprinting

The abstract concept of sustainable development has been with us for about 30 years, but new approaches like ecological footprinting are now enabling us to get a clearer insight into how our consumption relates to the biological productivity of the planet.

WWF and Global Footprint Network's Living Planet Report lists all the biologically productive land, or available biocapacity, on the planet: The total biocapacity, 11.3 billion global hectares (126 million km2) accounts for 22% of the Earth's surface. The rest is desert, high mountain or deep ocean which are of low biological productivity. If we put aside 10% for wildlife, we are left with 10.17 billion global hectares of biologically productive land and sea from which to meet human needs.

Source: WWF Living Planet Report 2006

The ecological footprint gives an indication of the biologically productive areas of land and sea required to meet our consumption of food, energy, materials and for absorbing our wastes. So, for example, on average, we need 25 global hectares of fishing grounds for each tonne of fish we consume each year. We need 1.3 global hectares of forest for each cubic metre of timber we use annually; and 0.35 global hectares of forest to absorb each tonne of carbon dioxide we release from burning fossil fuels each year. By adding up how much food, energy, building materials, paper and so on we are consuming, we can calculate how much of the earth’s biocapacity is required to support an individual, a city, a country, or indeed the world's population. This last collective figure is our world ecological footprint.

Ecological footprint studies suggest that as a global society we started to exceed the biocapacity of the planet – its long term carrying capacity – in the early 1970s. In 2001 we were consuming around 21% more than the planet could sustain. In other words, we need 1.21 planet Earths to meet our current global levels of consumption. In effect we are maintaining our current lifestyles by eating into the natural reserves, or natural capital, of the planet. For example, we are doing this by losing forest areas around the world, depleting fish stocks, mining the soil of its fertility and burning fossil energy reserves to fuel our current levels of consumption.

Growth of the world ecological footprint since 1960.

The aggregate figure represented by the world ecological footprint hides large differences in the consumption between nations. Whereas the global average per capita footprint is 2.2 global hectares. The smallest per capita footprints are found in Afghanistan (0.1 global hectares per person) and the largest in the United Arab Emirates (11.9 global hectares per person).

Source: Global Footprint Network

If we divide the available biocapacity figure of 10.17 billion global hectares by the 6 billion human population of the planet, we get a figure of 1.7 global hectares. This represents a per capita "fair share" of the planet's resources. If we lived sustainably, this figure would represent, as a global average, the maximum per capita consumption.

However, the average person in the UK currently has an ecological footprint of around 5.4 global hectares, or three times the global per capita target. This means that if everyone on the planet consumed as much as the average UK citizen we'd need three planets to support us. If we in the UK decided to live within our fair share of the Earth's resources, we'd need to reduce our ecological footprint by two-thirds.

With the average person in the USA having a footprint of 9.5 global hectares, if we were all Americans, we'd need 5 planets to support us. Americans would, on average, need a five-sixths (83%) reduction to be sustainable.

Our work and that of others indicates that the targets for reducing our ecological footprints, they are achievable, but significant changes are needed. We will need to move from fossil fuels to renewable energy, reduce wasteful consumption, recycle the vast majority of our waste and use virgin resources much more efficiently. We will need to reduce unnecessary transport and employ science and technology wisely. We will have to practise good housekeeping. As nations we take for granted that we should try to balance our financial budgets. In future we need to balance ecological budgets as well.

BedZED eco-footprint

A BedZED resident leading a conventional lifestyle can expect to reduce their eco-footprint down to 4.3 global hectares. They benefit from BedZED's sustainable built-in infrastructure. However, if they change their lifestyle dramatically they can live a one planet 1.7 hectare lifestyle. This would mean opting out of the unsustainable infrastructure that surrounds us e.g. choosing home schooling and never flying. This is not realistic for most people. The new sustainable communities that we are working on through the One Planet Living programme, in partnership with WWF, will be larger than BedZED and so will be able to tackle infrastructure more fully so that residents can lead a realistic one planet lifestyle.

Last updated 7th August 2007.