The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept

生态足迹

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at:https:///publication/228421705

The dynamics of the ecological footprintconcept

ARTICLE in ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS · MARCH 2000

Impact Factor: 2.72 · DOI: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00150-0

CITATIONSREADS

123

1 AUTHOR:

Robert Costanza

Australian National University

375 PUBLICATIONS 27,345 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

445

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,letting you access and read them immediately.Available from: Robert CostanzaRetrieved on: 27 January 2016

生态足迹

EcologicalEconomics32(2000)341–345

/locate/ecolecon

COMMENTARY

FORUM:THEECOLOGICALFOOTPRINT

Thedynamicsoftheecologicalfootprintconcept

RobertCostanza*

DepartmentofBiology,CenterforEn6ironmentalScience,andInstituteforEcologicalEconomics,Uni6ersityofMaryland,Box38,

1WilliamsStreet,Solomons,MD20688-0038,USA

1.Background

-mentariesincludedineachforumareinvited,withaneyetowardpresentingabalancedandinterest-ingdiscussionoftheissueathand.Ininvitingandreviewingthecommentaries,wearethereforenotseekingmerelycritiquesorsupportofparticularworks(althoughthiscancertainlybeincluded),butratherthoughtfuldiscussionandinterpreta-tionoftheissuestheyraise,andcreativeexten-sionsintonewareas.

Theissuesof‘indicators’and‘biophysicallim-its’intheirvariousguiseshavebeencentralonesforEcologicalEconomicssinceitsinception.Therehasbeenmuchrecentinterestinanddiscussionofoneparticularindicator,knownasthe‘EcologicalFootprint’(EF),includingabook(WackernagelandRees,1996)andtworecentarticlesinEcolog-icalEconomics(vandenBerghandVerbruggen,1999;Wackernageletal.,1999).

TheEFforaparticularpopulationisde nedasthetotal‘‘areaofproductivelandandwater

*Tel.:+1-410-326-7263;fax:+1-410-326-7354.E-mailaddress:costza@cbl.umces.edu(R.Costanza)ecosystemsrequiredtoproducetheresourcesthatthepopulationconsumesandassimilatethewastesthatthepopulationproduces,whereveronEarththatlandandwatermaybelocated’’(Rees,2000).TheEFhasbeenwidelypraisedasaneffectiveheuristicandpedagogicdeviceforpre-sentingcurrenttotalhumanresourceuseinawaythatcommunicateseasilytoalmosteveryone.Al-thoughthereareongoingdebatesaboutspeci cmethodsforcalculatingtheEF(cf.Herendeen,2000;SimmonsandLewis,2000),everyone,itseems,understandslandareaasanumeraire—eventhosewhohavetroublewithmoneyoren-ergyasanumeraire.

ThecontroversycomeswhenonemovesfromsimplystatingtheresultsofanEFcalculationtointerpretingitasanindicatorofsomethingelse.TheEFhasbeenproposedasanindicatorofbiophysicallimitsandsustainability,i.e.ifone’sEFisbiggerthanthelandareaunderone’sdirectcontrolthen‘overshoot’hasoccurredandonehasexceededone’ssustainableresourceuse.Inotherwords,cantheEFbeusedasa‘‘guidelinetoachievingsustainability’’astheDutchenviron-mentministerinquiredofHansOpschoor(Op-schoor,2000)orisitmerelyaninterestingattentiongettingdevice?

0921-8009/00/$-seefrontmatter©2000ElsevierScienceB.V.Allrightsreserved.PII:S0921-8009(99)00150-0

生态足迹

342R.Costanza/EcologicalEconomics32(2000)341–345

ThecommentariesincludedinthisforumlookattheEFfromseveraldifferentperspectives,andinparticularaddresstheissuesofitsproperinter-pretationanduse.Someargueinfavorofitsbroaduseforpolicyquestionsaboutsustainabil-ity(Rees,2000;Templet,2000;WackernagelandSilverstein,2000),whileothers,acknowledgingtheEF’spedagogicvalue,seeamuchmorelimiteduseforpolicy-making(Ayres,2000;Opschoor,2000;vanKootenandBulte,2000)orseeitasbeingusefulinadifferentwayforpolicy-making(Deutschetal.,2000;Moffatt,2000;Rapport,2000).Ihavetriedtosummarizetheseperspec-tives,whileaddingafewofmyownideastothemix.

2.Thecostsandbene tsofaggregateindicatorsAssessmentofhumanresourceusehasbeengoingonforaverylongtime.ThepoweroftheEFisthatitaggregatesandconvertstypicallycomplexresourceusepatternstoasinglenumber—theequivalentlandarearequired.Assuch,itsharescertaincostsandbene tswithallaggregateindicators(suchasgrossnationalproduct(GNP),indexofsustainableeconomicwelfare(ISEW),environmentalspace,embodiedenergy,etc.).Theobviousandsubstantialbene tofanaggregateindicatorisitsproductionofasinglenumber,whichmakesusingitfordecision-makingrela-tivelystraightforward.Forexample:ifISEWgoesup,itsagoodthing;ifitgoesdown,itsabadthing.Ultimately,inordertomakeadecision,wemustgothroughthisprocessofreducinganum-berofcriteriatoasimplecomparison.Wedothiseitherexplicitlyorimplicitly.Even‘multi-criteria’analysisdoesthisusinganyofanumberofdiffer-entaggregationmethods.

Thecostsofanaggregateindicatorarethat,ifoneisnotcarefulandinformed,onecanbeignorantofwherethenumberscamefrom,howtheywereaggregated,theuncertainties,weights,andassumptionsinvolved,etc.It’snotthatone‘loses’themoredetailedinformation—usuallyitispossibletolookatthedetailsofhowanyaggregateindicatorhasbeenconstructed—butratherthatdecision-makersaretoobusytodeal

withthesedetails.Thebeautyoftheaggregateindicatoristhatitdoesthatjobforthem.Evengiventhisadvantageofaggregateindicators,nosingleonecanpossiblyanswerallquestionsandmultipleindicatorswillalwaysbeneeded(Op-schoor,2000),aswillintelligentandinformeduseoftheoneswehave.

3.Biophysicallimitsandsustainability

AnotherimportantissueiswhethertheEFisanindicatorofsustainability.Thecontentionthatitisrestsontheassumptionthatifbiophysicallimitsareexceeded(usingcurrenttechnologies),thenwearenotsustainableandtheEFisanindicatorofthedegreetowhichbiophysicallimitshavebeenapproachedorexceeded(atleastattheglobalscale;seelater).Ofcourse,theimportantcaveatherefortechnologicaloptimistsis‘usingcurrenttechnologies’.Theywouldarguethatthecurrentpathofdevelopmentis,infact,sustain-ablebecausetechnologywillbeabletoovercomeanybiophysicalconstraintsitmayencounter.Thisistrueifandonlyiftheunderlyingassumptionsabouttechnicalprogressaretrue.Iftheyarenotandwepursuepoliciesbasedontheirbeingtrue,thenwewillmostlikelyendupinbig,unsustain-able,trouble(Costanza,1999).Sinceweareinasituationoftrueuncertaintyaboutwhethertheassumptionsunderlyingthetechnologicaloptimistpositionaretrue,weshouldatleastprovisionallyassumethattheyarenottrue(sincethecostsoftheirbeingwrongarepotentiallysohigh).Themorerationalstrategyfromthepointofviewofsocietyasawholeistoassumethatbiophysicallimitscannotbeovercome,unlessanduntilitcanbeshownthattheycanbe(Costanza,1999).ThisstrategymakestheEFausefulprovisionalindica-torofsustainabilityattheglobalscale,butitshouldbecastintheseterms;asatechnologicallyskepticalindicator,onethatassumesthattechnol-ogywillnotsaveus.Alternately,onecanthinkoftheEFasameasureofhowmuchfaithintech-nologyisrequiredinordertoconsidercurrentconsumptionpatternssustainable.

生态足迹

R.Costanza/EcologicalEconomics32(2000)341–345343

4.Self-suf ciencyversussustainability

Anotherissuethatthisforumbringsoutisthedistinctionbetweenself-suf ciencyandsustain-ability.EFproponentstendtowardtheviewthatself-suf ciencyisanecessaryconditionforsustain-ability(WackernagelandSilverstein,2000),whilecriticsarguethatthetwoarenotnecessarilyre-lated(Ayres,2000;Opschoor,2000;vanKootenandBulte,2000).ThisquestionisrelatedtowhethertheEFhasanyinterpretationvis-a`-viscarryingcapacityatscaleslowerthantheglobal,andwhetherinternationalandinterregionaltradecanbepartofasustainableworld.Ithinkitisclearthatsustainabletradeisatleastpossibleetal.1995),andthattheproperinter-pretationoftheEFatnationalandregionalscalesissimplyasameasureofthenetinputfromoutsidetheregionconvertedtoequivalentlandareaunits.Ittellsuslittleifanythingaboutthesustainabilityofthisinputovertime,althoughitmaytellussomethingaboutthe‘fairness’ofconsumption(WackernagelandSilverstein,2000).Nocityhaseverexistedthatdidnotdependonitshinterlandforsupport(Folkeetal.,1997),andevenhuntingandgatheringtribesrelyoninputsfromamuchlargerareathanthatofthevillageitself.However,thefactremainsthatmanypeoplearesimplyunawareofthisrelationshipbetweencities(ornations)andtheirhinterlands,andtheEFcommunicatesthisfacteffectively.

Ontheotherhand,thecurrentsystemofinter-nationaltrade,whichignoresenvironmentalexter-nalitiesanddifferencesinlaborlawsandconditions,isprobablyneithersustainablenorisitnecessarilyfair(Costanzaetal.,1995).Forexam-

Fig.1.STELLAdiagramofthemodel.Boxesarestatevariables,doublelinearrowswithcirclesare ows,singlelinearrowsarefunctionalrelationships,andcircleswithsmallboxesinsideareparameters.

ple,tobefair,thedecisionoftheNetherlandstoimportcarryingcapacitywouldhavetobebal-ancedbyawillingnessofothercountriestoexportcarryingcapacity.Buttheamountvoluntarilyex-portedmayexceedlong-runsustainablecarryingcapacityandtheexportmaynotinfactbevolun-tary.TotheextentthattheEFcannotdistinguishbetweensustainableandfair,andunsustainableandunfairtrade,thecriticswhoarguethatcertaininterpretationsoftheEFare‘biasedagainsttrade’(vandenBerghandVerbruggen,1999;SimmonsandLewis,2000;vanKootenandBulte,2000)haveapoint.

5.Thedynamicsofinterestinideas

Finally,theEFis,Ibelieve,caughtinadynamicthatiscommontomany,ifnotmost,newideas.Haveyouevernoticedthatinterestinanewideatakesoffrapidlyat rst,withexpandingclaimsofapplicability,butthenpeaksandoftena‘back-lash’occurswithplummetinginterestlevels?Theremaybearesurgenceofinterestatsomelatertime,followedperhapsbyanotherdeclineininterest,andthiscyclemaycontinueforquiteawhile.Fig.1isasimplemodelofthisdynamic.Theinterestinanewidea,I(theboxinFig.1)isfedbyitsnovelty(N),butthisinputdegradesquicklywithtime.Itisalsoaffectedbyitsdegreeofdeviationfromthereallong-terminterestintheidea,R(thinkofthisasthe‘carryingcapacity’oftheidea).Thisdeviationiscorrectedwithacertainrateofdiffusion(r).Thereisalsoalaginpercep-tion(L)suchthattheinterestintheideaseveraltimestepsagoiswhatisbeingperceivedratherthanthecurrentinterest.Themodelequationsare:dI/dt=N DIN=max(N0 t2),0

DI=r[lag(I) R]

whereIistheinterestintheidea,Nthenoveltyoftheidea,N0theinitialnovelty,tthetime,rtherateofdiffusion,andRthereallong-terminterestintheidea.

ThismodelproducesoutputofthetypeshowninFig.2.Fig.2ashowsoutputwithrateof

生态足迹

344R.Costanza/EcologicalEconomics32(2000)341–345

Fig.2.Modelrunswithparametervaluesasshown.

diffusion(r)variedovertherangefrom0.05to0.45withintervalsof0.05,laginperception(L)=3,reallong-terminterest(R)=1000,andinitialnovelty(N)=500.Atlowdiffusionrates,theideaovershootsRsigni cantly,andeventuallypeaksandgraduallyreturnstoR.Astherateofdiffusionisincreased,theideapeakssoonerandatalowerlevel,andreturnstoRsooner.Asthediffusionrateincreasesfurtherstill,theinterestintheideabecomesoscillatory,dampedat rstbutbecominglessdampedastherateofdiffusionisincreased,and nallyenteringaparameterspacewheretheamplitudeoftheoscillationsarein-creasingwithtime.Fig.2bshowsthesituationwiththelaginperceptionsetto0.Inthiscase,theoscillationsneversetinandthemagnitudeofovershootisreducedasthediffusionrateisincreased.

Theobjectiveofscienti cdiscussionsistoachievethereallong-terminterestlevelasquicklyaspossiblewithaslittleovershoot(orunder-shoot)aspossible,andavoidingtime-consuminganddisruptiveoscillationsininterestlevels,espe-ciallythosewithincreasingamplitudeovertime.Todothis,oneneedstoreducethelaginpercep-tionofinterestintheidea,reducetheeffectsof

生态足迹

R.Costanza/EcologicalEconomics32(2000)341–345345

initialnovelty,andincreasetherateofdiffusiontoatleastamoderatelyhighlevel.Scienti cjour-nals(includingEcologicalEconomics)unfortu-natelyintroducesigni cantlagsinperception,rewardnovelty,anddiffuseideasataratherlowrate.Itislittlewonder,then,thatnewideassuchastheEFmayexperiencethekindofdynamicsoutlinedinthispaper.Hopefully,foraofthetypewearepresentingherewillhelpalleviatethissituationbyincreasingdiscussionanddiffusion,andreducinglagsinperception.

References

Ayres,R.,2000.Ontheutilityoftheecologicalfootprint

concept.Ecol.Econ.32(3),347–349.

Costanza,R.,1999.Fourvisionsofthecenturyahead:willit

beStarTreck,Ecotopia,BigGovernment,orMadMax?Futurist33,23–28.

Costanza,R.,Audley,J.,Borden,R.,Ekins,P.,Folke,C.,

Funtowicz,S.O.,Harris,J.,1995.Sustainabletrade:anewparadigmforworldwelfare.Environment37(16–20),39–44.

Deutsch,L.,Jansson,A.,Troell,M.,Ro¨nnba¨ck,P.,Folke,C.,

Kautsky,N.,2000.The‘ecologicalfootprint’—communi-catinghumandependenceonnature’swork.Ecol.Econ.32(3),351–355.

Folke,C.,Jansson,A

.,Larsson,J.,Costanza,R.,1997.Ecosystemappropriationbycities.Ambio26,167–172.

.

Herendeen,R.,2000.Ecologicalfootprintisavividindicator

ofindirecteffects.Ecol.Econ.32(3),357–358.

Moffatt,I.,2000.Ecologicalfootprintsandsustainabledevel-opment.Ecol.Econ.32(3),359–362.

Opschoor,H.,2000.Theecologicalfootprint:measuringrod

ormetaphor?EcologicalEconomics(thisvolume).

Rapport,D.J.,2000.Ecologicalfootprintsandecosystem

health:complementaryapproachestoasustainablefuture.Ecol.Econ.32(3),367–370.

Rees,W.E.,2000.Eco-footprintanalysis:meritsandbrickbats.

Ecol.Econ.32(3),371–374.

Simmons,C.,Lewis,K.,2000.Twofeet—twoapproaches:a

component-basedmodelofecologicalfootprinting.Ecol.Econ.32(3),375–380.

Templet,P.H.,2000.Externalities,subsidiesandtheecological

footprint.,Ecol.Econ.32(3),381–383.

vandenBergh,J.C.J.M.,Verbruggen,H.,1999.Spatialsus-tainability,tradeandindicators:anevaluationoftheeco-logicalfootprint.Ecol.Econ.29,61–72.

vanKooten,G.C.,Bulte,E.H.,2000.Theecologicalfootprint

—usefulscienceorpolitics?Ecol.Econ.32(3),385–389.Wackernagel,M.,Rees,W.E.,1996.Ourecologicalfootprint:

redudinghumanimpactontheearth.NewSociety,Gabri-olaIsland,BC,Canada.

Wackernagel,M.,Silverstein,J.,2000.Bigthings rst:focus-ingonthescaleimperativewiththeecologicalfootprint.Ecol.Econ.32(3),391–394.

Wackernagel,M.,Onisto,L.,Bello,P.,CallejasLinares,A.,

Lo´pezFalfa´n,I.S.,Me´ndezGarc ´a,J.,Sua´rezGuerrero,A.I.,Sua´rezGuerrero,M.G.,1999.Nationalnaturalcapi-talaccountingwiththeecologicalfootprintconcept.Ecol.Econ.29,375–390.

.

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/sq41.html