IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i7p9326-9343d52662.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Calculating Puerto Rico’s Ecological Footprint (1970–2010) Using Freely Available Data

Author

Listed:
  • Matthew E. Hopton

    (National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA)

  • Adam Berland

    (National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 26 W. Martin Luther King Dr., Cincinnati, OH 45268, USA)

Abstract

Ecological Footprint Analysis (EFA) is appealing as a metric of sustainability because it is straightforward in theory and easy to conceptualize. However, EFA is difficult to implement because it requires extensive data. A simplified approach to EFA that requires fewer data can serve as a perfunctory analysis allowing researchers to examine a system with relatively little cost and effort. We examined whether a simplified approach using freely available data could be applied to Puerto Rico, a densely populated island with limited land resources. Forty-one years of data were assembled to compute the ecological footprint from 1970 to 2010. According to EFA, individuals in Puerto Rico were moving toward sustainability over time, as the per capita ecological footprint decreased from 3.69 ha per capita (ha/ca) in 1970 to 3.05 ha/ca in 2010. However, due to population growth, the population’s footprint rose from 1.00 × 10 7 ha in 1970 to 1.14 × 10 7 ha in 2010, indicating Puerto Rico as a whole was moving away from sustainability. Our findings demonstrate the promise for conducting EFA using a simplified approach with freely available data, and we discuss potential limitations on data quality and availability that should be addressed to further improve the science.

Suggested Citation

  • Matthew E. Hopton & Adam Berland, 2015. "Calculating Puerto Rico’s Ecological Footprint (1970–2010) Using Freely Available Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9326-9343:d:52662
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9326/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/7/9326/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason Venetoulis & John Talberth, 2008. "Refining the ecological footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 441-469, August.
    2. Bagliani, Marco & Bravo, Giangiacomo & Dalmazzone, Silvana, 2008. "A consumption-based approach to environmental Kuznets curves using the ecological footprint indicator," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 650-661, April.
    3. Olivia Odom Green & Ahjond S. Garmestani & Matthew E. Hopton & Matthew T. Heberling, 2014. "A Multi-Scalar Examination of Law for Sustainable Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(6), pages 1-18, May.
    4. Kitzes, Justin & Galli, Alessandro & Bagliani, Marco & Barrett, John & Dige, Gorm & Ede, Sharon & Erb, Karlheinz & Giljum, Stefan & Haberl, Helmut & Hails, Chris & Jolia-Ferrier, Laurent & Jungwirth, , 2009. "A research agenda for improving national Ecological Footprint accounts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1991-2007, May.
    5. Haberl, Helmut & Erb, Karl-Heinz & Krausmann, Fridolin, 2001. "How to calculate and interpret ecological footprints for long periods of time: the case of Austria 1926-1995," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 25-45, July.
    6. Lenzen, Manfred & Murray, Shauna A., 2001. "A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 229-255, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yue, Dongxia & Xu, Xiaofeng & Hui, Cang & Xiong, Youcai & Han, Xuemei & Ma, Jinhui, 2011. "Biocapacity supply and demand in Northwestern China: A spatial appraisal of sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 988-994, March.
    2. Thomas Wiedmann & John Barrett, 2010. "A Review of the Ecological Footprint Indicator—Perceptions and Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(6), pages 1-49, June.
    3. Ferng, Jiun-Jiun, 2014. "Nested open systems: An important concept for applying ecological footprint analysis to sustainable development assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 105-111.
    4. 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.
    5. Kastner, Thomas & Kastner, Michael & Nonhebel, Sanderine, 2011. "Tracing distant environmental impacts of agricultural products from a consumer perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1032-1040, April.
    6. 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.
    7. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    8. White, Thomas J., 2007. "Sharing resources: The global distribution of the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(2), pages 402-410, December.
    9. Yu Ding & Jian Peng, 2018. "Impacts of Urbanization of Mountainous Areas on Resources and Environment: Based on Ecological Footprint Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-15, March.
    10. Hoekstra, A.Y., 2009. "Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1963-1974, May.
    11. Jin, Wei & Xu, Linyu & Yang, Zhifeng, 2009. "Modeling a policy making framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating system dynamics into the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2938-2949, October.
    12. Xiaoman Liu & Dong Jiang & Qiao Wang & Huiming Liu & Jin Li & Zhuo Fu, 2016. "Evaluating the Sustainability of Nature Reserves Using an Ecological Footprint Method: A Case Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-9, December.
    13. Shuhui Zhang & Fuquan Li & Yuke Zhou & Ziyuan Hu & Ruixin Zhang & Xiaoyu Xiang & Yali Zhang, 2022. "Using Net Primary Productivity to Characterize the Spatio-Temporal Dynamics of Ecological Footprint for a Resource-Based City, Panzhihua in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-14, March.
    14. Ramita Manandhar & Inakwu O.A. Odeh & Tihomir Ancev, 2014. "Assessment of Spatial-Temporal Expansion of Built-up and Residential-Commercial Dwellings with Some Economic Implications: A Case Study in the Lower Hunter of Eastern Australia," Land, MDPI, vol. 3(1), pages 1-21, March.
    15. Mindaugas Staniunas & Marija Burinskiene & Vida Maliene, 2012. "Ecology in Urban Planning: Mitigating the Environmental Damage of Municipal Solid Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(9), pages 1-18, August.
    16. Mamouni Limnios, Elena Alexandra & Ghadouani, Anas & Schilizzi, Steven G.M. & Mazzarol, Tim, 2009. "Giving the consumer the choice: A methodology for Product Ecological Footprint calculation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(10), pages 2525-2534, August.
    17. Jincheng Li & Xinyue Zhang & Xuexiu Chang & Wei Gao, 2018. "Revising Yield and Equivalence Factors of Ecological Footprints Based on Land-Use Conversion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-17, November.
    18. Xiaoman Liu & Jingying Fu & Dong Jiang & Jianwu Luo & Chenxi Sun & Huiming Liu & Ruihong Wen & Xuefeng Wang, 2018. "Improvement of Ecological Footprint Model in National Nature Reserve Based on Net Primary Production (NPP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    19. Henders, Sabine & Ostwald, Madelene, 2014. "Accounting methods for international land-related leakage and distant deforestation drivers," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 21-28.
    20. Jóhannesson, S.E. & Davíðsdóttir, B. & Heinonen, J.T., 2018. "Standard Ecological Footprint Method for Small, Highly Specialized Economies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 370-380.

    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:7:y:2015:i:7:p:9326-9343:d:52662. 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.