Online calculators of 'ecological footprint': do they promote or dissuade sustainable behaviour?

Ecological footprint (EF) indices estimate the impact of an individual's lifestyle on the planet by converting levels of consumption into the amount of land needed to sustain production levels and lifestyle choices. Several popular organizations (e.g. WWF, Global Footprint Network) now offer personalized EF calculators to help inform consumers of the impacts of their personal consumption habits. In this paper, we evaluate the most popular online EF calculators and find that, even when the most environmentally friendly options are adopted, for the majority of available indices, one still exceeds the planet's biocapacity levels. The absence of options to fully offset one's environmental impacts implicitly suggests that there is no truly sustainable level of consumption at current population levels, even under the most prudent consumer choices. Although all online EF calculators claim to be a tool for education to promote sustainable behaviour, their calculations suggest, to the contrary, that as consumers we may postpone but not necessarily prevent environmental catastrophes.

[1]  J. Randers,et al.  Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[2]  Piet Rietveld,et al.  Spatial welfare economics versus ecological footprint: modeling agglomeration, externalities and trade , 2007 .

[3]  Ian Moffatt,et al.  Ecological footprints and sustainable development , 2000 .

[4]  Paul Hooper,et al.  Can eco-footprinting analysis be used successfully to encourage more sustainable behaviour at the household level? , 2008 .

[5]  M. Wackernagel,et al.  Perceptual and structural barriers to investing in natural capital: Economics from an ecological footprint perspective , 1997 .

[6]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  A stitch in time: self-regulation and proactive coping. , 1997, Psychological bulletin.

[7]  K. Saravanamuthu.  A journey of socialising the risks associated with global warming: a Gandhian insight into Schumacher's total accounting and accountability , 2009 .

[8]  Stefan Giljum,et al.  Applying physical input-output analysis to estimate land appropriation (ecological footprints) of international trade activities , 2003 .

[9]  J. Bergh,et al.  Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint’ , 1999 .

[10]  Erwin H. Bulte,et al.  The ecological footprint: useful science or politics? , 2000 .

[11]  Gene Bazan.  Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth , 1997 .

[12]  R. Levett.  Footprinting: A great step forward, but tread carefully — a response to Mathis Wackernagel , 1998 .

[13]  K. Saravanamuthu.  Emancipatory accounting and sustainable development: a Gandhian–Vedic theorization of experimenting with truth , 2006 .

[14]  E. Greenglass,et al.  Proactive coping and quality of life management. , 2002 .

[15]  K. Linnerud,et al.  The sustainable development area: satisfying basic needs and safeguarding ecological sustainability , 2007 .

[16]  P. Crutzen.  Geology of mankind , 2002, Nature.

[17]  J. Talberth,et al.  Refining the ecological footprint , 2008 .

[18]  Stewart Barr,et al.  What we buy, what we throw away and how we use our voice. Sustainable household waste management in the UK , 2004 .

[19]  Nathan Fiala,et al.  Measuring sustainability: Why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science , 2008 .

[20]  Lisa V. Bardwell.  Problem-Framing: A perspective on environmental problem-solving , 1991 .

[21]  M. Ojala.  Confronting macrosocial worries: Worry about environmental problems and proactive coping among a group of young volunteers , 2007 .

[22]  A. Cortese.  THE CRITICAL ROLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN CREATING A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE , 2003 .