This article is based on:

New methodology for the ecological footprint with an application to the New Zealand economy

Sustainability is a big issue in the world today, but the bigger challenge is measuring our progress. One way is to consider how much land is needed to sustain a population; our ecological footprint. As displayed in the image below, the requirements of the man are so much larger than himself and so diverse. The writers of this paper have created a unique way to measure an ecological footprint: what a country exports and imports. 

Previous methods used to calculate ecological footprint often relied on uncertain data, like the amount of agricultural land available for farming.  This study views imported products as a form of input and exports as a form of output, thus the methodology to calculate these figures becomes consistent. It also:

• • Cleverly links economic activity with environmental impact;.
• • Is simpler to calculate;
• • Uses more recent data than other studies and so is
• • Easily replicated. 

It creates a consistent yardstick to measure our progress towards sustainability.

It is important to manage how the economy affects the environment because, in my opinion, a sustainable country will, in the long run, have a stronger economy. For example a carton of milk requires:

• • Pasture land to support cows,
• • Forestry land to produce packaging 
• • Built land (roads, buildings) for transport and final sale. 
• • Land required to absorb the CO₂ emissions. 

If one of those resources is not cared for the chain collapses and future generations may pay the price.

However, changing the technology we use and our lifestyle helps reduce our impact. As an exercise, I calculated my ecological footprint at two websites. On carbonzero I could purchase carbon credits to offset my personal impact and the Environmental Protection Agency website gave an in depth critique of my home lifestyle (who doesn’t like a good quiz!). I was shocked by my results (below), as I believed that I was living sustainably, but was confused when each website gave a different result. If these measurements can be confusing on an individual level, imagine how much more confusing on a national or global level! 

 In 1991 it took 3.49 hectares of land per year to sustain an average Kiwi’s level of consumption; in 1998 it took 3.08 hectares. Based on this it appears we are becoming more sustainable, but this may be due to differences in calculation methods; thus the need for a consistent method of calculation. New Zealand’s footprint is not as high as other developed countries’ (such as the USA), probably due to our low population, but there is always room for improvement! We need accurate tools to measure our success. 

Using this method, we can calculate how much of New Zealand’s ecological footprint is imported  (from our use of goods and services.). For example if we imported apples from a farm in Australia - that farm would be part of our ecological footprint. In 1991, 26% of our ecological footprint was imported; at the same time we were exporting a huge 14 million hectares: almost 50% of our land area.  From this we can see how reliant we are on imports and exports to maintain our levels of consumption.

To summarise, this method provides a simple way to include sustainability goals in our country’s future plans and a yardstick by which to measure our progress. As humans we are causing large amounts of damage to our planet. Even renowned physicist Stephen Hawking does not think “the human race will survive the next thousand years", that is "unless we spread into space.” While this may be true, I believe that we should care for what we have.  After all, there is no planet B.

Sources:

Journal article: Bicknell, K. B., Ball, R. J., Cullen, R., & Bigsby, H. R. (1998). New methodology for the ecological footprint with an application to the New Zealand economy. Ecological Economics, 27(2), 149-160. 

Photo: Man and ecological footprint