IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v5y2013i5p1960-1973d25428.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for the Ecological Footprint of Materials in Consumer Goods at the Urban Scale

Author

Listed:
  • Meidad Kissinger

    (Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, 8410501, Israel)

  • Cornelia Sussman

    (School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z2, Canada)

  • Jennie Moore

    (School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z2, Canada)

  • William E. Rees

    (School of Community and Regional Planning, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, V6T 1Z2, Canada)

Abstract

Ecological footprint analysis (EFA) can be used by cities to account for their on-going demands on global renewable resources. To date, EFA has not been fully implemented as an urban policy and planning tool in part due to limitations of local data availability. In this paper we focus on the material consumption component of the urban ecological footprint and identify the ‘component, solid waste life cycle assessment approach’ as one that overcomes data limitations by using data many cities regularly collect: municipal, solid waste composition data which serves as a proxy for material consumption. The approach requires energy use and/or carbon dioxide emissions data from process LCA studies as well as agricultural and forest land data for calculation of a material’s ecological footprint conversion value. We reviewed the process LCA literature for twelve materials commonly consumed in cities and determined ecological footprint conversion values for each. We found a limited number of original LCA studies but were able to generate a range of values for each material. Our set of values highlights the importance for cities to identify both the quantities consumed and per unit production impacts of a material. Some materials like textiles and aluminum have high ecological footprints but make up relatively smaller proportions of urban waste streams than products like paper and diapers. Local government use of the solid waste LCA approach helps to clearly identify the ecological loads associated with the waste they manage on behalf of their residents. This direct connection can be used to communicate to citizens about stewardship, recycling and ecologically responsible consumption choices that contribute to urban sustainability.

Suggested Citation

  • Meidad Kissinger & Cornelia Sussman & Jennie Moore & William E. Rees, 2013. "Accounting for the Ecological Footprint of Materials in Consumer Goods at the Urban Scale," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:5:p:1960-1973:d:25428
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/5/1960/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/5/1960/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wiedmann, Thomas & Minx, Jan & Barrett, John & Wackernagel, Mathis, 2006. "Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with input-output analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 28-48, January.
    2. Huijbregts, Mark A.J. & Hellweg, Stefanie & Frischknecht, Rolf & Hungerbuhler, Konrad & Hendriks, A. Jan, 2008. "Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(4), pages 798-807, February.
    3. Meidad Kissinger & Abraham Haim, 2008. "Urban hinterlands—the case of an Israeli town ecological footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 391-405, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Umberto Lucia & Debora Fino & Giulia Grisolia, 2022. "A thermoeconomic indicator for the sustainable development with social considerations," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 2022-2036, February.
    2. Gu, Qiwei & Wang, Hongqi & Zheng, Yinan & Zhu, Jingwen & Li, Xiaoke, 2015. "Ecological footprint analysis for urban agglomeration sustainability in the middle stream of the Yangtze River," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 318(C), pages 86-99.
    3. Alison Rothwell & Brad Ridoutt & William Bellotti, 2016. "Greenhouse Gas Implications of Peri-Urban Land Use Change in a Developed City under Four Future Climate Scenarios," Land, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-23, December.
    4. Reza Farrahi Moghaddam & Fereydoun Farrahi Moghaddam & Mohamed Cheriet, 2014. "A Multi-Entity Input Output (MEIO) Approach to Sustainability - Water-Energy-GHG (WEG) Footprint Statements in Use Cases from Auto and Telco Industries," Papers 1404.6227, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2014.
    5. Umberto Lucia & Giulia Grisolia, 2021. "The Gouy-Stodola Theorem—From Irreversibility to Sustainability—The Thermodynamic Human Development Index," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    7. Wannipa Koodsela & Huang Dong & Kassara Sukpatch, 2019. "A Holistic Conceptual Framework into Practice-Based on Urban Tourism Toward Sustainable Development in Thailand," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-28, December.
    8. Emanuele Bonamente & Franco Cotana, 2015. "Carbon and Energy Footprints of Prefabricated Industrial Buildings: A Systematic Life Cycle Assessment Analysis," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-17, November.
    9. Fan, Yupeng & Qiao, Qi & Xian, Chaofan & Xiao, Yang & Fang, Lin, 2017. "A modified ecological footprint method to evaluate environmental impacts of industrial parks," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 293-299.
    10. D. Daniel & S. Satriani & Sefriyani Lea Zudi & Anjana Ekka, 2022. "To What Extent Does Indigenous Local Knowledge Support the Social–Ecological System? A Case Study of the Ammatoa Community, Indonesia," Resources, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, November.
    11. Antonella Lerario & Silvia Di Turi, 2018. "Sustainable Urban Tourism: Reflections on the Need for Building-Related Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-25, June.
    12. Lin Zhen & Bingzhen Du, 2017. "Ecological Footprint Analysis Based on Changing Food Consumption in a Poorly Developed Area of China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-18, August.
    13. Liming Zhang & Bing Xue & Yong Geng & Wanxia Ren & Chengpeng Lu, 2014. "Emergy-Based City’s Sustainability and Decoupling Assessment: Indicators, Features and Findings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-15, February.
    14. Marco Filippo Torchio & Umberto Lucia & Giulia Grisolia, 2020. "Economic and Human Features for Energy and Environmental Indicators: A Tool to Assess Countries’ Progress towards Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-19, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    2. Hans P. Aubauer, 2011. "Development of Ecological Footprint to an Essential Economic and Political Tool," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Teixidó Figueras, Jordi & Duro Moreno, Juan Antonio, 2012. "Ecological Footprint Inequality: A methodological review and some results," Working Papers 2072/203168, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Department of Economics.
    4. Johann Audrain & Mateo Cordier & Sylvie Faucheux & Martin O’Connor, 2013. "Écologie territoriale et indicateurs pour un développement durable de la métropole parisienne," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(3), pages 523-559.
    5. Basem Ertimi & Tamat Sarmidi & Norlin Khalid & Mohd Helmi Ali, 2021. "The Policy Framework of Natural Resource Management in Oil-Dependence Countries," Economies, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Michael Nye & Yvonne Rydin, 2008. "The Contribution of Ecological Footprinting to Planning Policy Development: Using REAP to Evaluate Policies for Sustainable Housing Construction," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 35(2), pages 227-247, April.
    7. Yulei Xie & Ling Ji & Beibei Zhang & Gordon Huang, 2018. "Evolution of the Scientific Literature on Input–Output Analysis: A Bibliometric Analysis of 1990–2017," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-17, September.
    8. Minihan, Erin S. & Wu, Ziping, 2011. "The Potential Economic and Environmental Costs of GHG Mitigation Measures for Cattle Sectors in Northern Ireland," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108779, Agricultural Economics Society.
    9. Ansari, Mohd Arshad, 2022. "Re-visiting the Environmental Kuznets curve for ASEAN: A comparison between ecological footprint and carbon dioxide emissions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    10. Monica Flores-Garcia & Alfredo Mainar, 2009. "Environmental Effects of Production and Consumption Activities Within an Economy: the Aragon Case," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 15(4), pages 437-455, November.
    11. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    12. Cheng, Xian & Zhao, Haichuan, 2019. "Modeling, analysis and mitigation of contagion in financial systems," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 281-292.
    13. Meng, Xiaoge & Yao, Zhong & Nie, Jiajia & Zhao, Yingxue & Li, Zenglu, 2018. "Low-carbon product selection with carbon tax and competition: Effects of the power structure," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 224-230.
    14. Xueting Zhao, 2014. "China's Inter-regional Trade of Virtual Water: a Multi-regional Input-output Modeling," Working Papers Working Paper 2014-04, Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University.
    15. Debrupa Chakraborty & Joyashree Roy, 2015. "Ecological footprint of paperboard and paper production unit in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 909-921, August.
    16. Cristiano Cantore & Miguel León-Ledesma & Peter McAdam & Alpo Willman, 2014. "Shocking Stuff: Technology, Hours, And Factor Substitution," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 108-128, February.
    17. Wiedmann, Thomas, 2009. "A first empirical comparison of energy Footprints embodied in trade -- MRIO versus PLUM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1975-1990, May.
    18. Yazan, Devrim Murat & Mandras, Giovanni & Garau, Giorgio, 2017. "Environmental and economic sustainability of integrated production in bio-refineries: The thistle case in Sardinia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PB), pages 349-360.
    19. Tukker, Arnold & Poliakov, Evgueni & Heijungs, Reinout & Hawkins, Troy & Neuwahl, Frederik & Rueda-Cantuche, José M. & Giljum, Stefan & Moll, Stephan & Oosterhaven, Jan & Bouwmeester, Maaike, 2009. "Towards a global multi-regional environmentally extended input-output database," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1928-1937, May.
    20. Shokoohi, Zeinab & Dehbidi, Navid Kargar & Tarazkar, Mohammad Hassan, 2022. "Energy intensity, economic growth and environmental quality in populous Middle East countries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PC).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:5:p:1960-1973:d:25428. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.