Ecological Footprint Investigation

IB Environmental Systems and Societies

Tina Fu Year 1 2012-2-20

Introduction:
An ecological footprint is the hypothetical area of land required by a society, groups of individual to fulfill all their resource needs and assimilate all wastes. Ecological footprint can act as a model for monitoring environmental impact. It was defined as "the area of productive land and water ecosystems required to produce the resources that the population consumes and assimilate the wastes that the population produces, wherever on Earth the land and water is located. The aim of this investigation is to justify the footprint sizes among different areas. To compare three different results of Ecological Footprint in three countries and come up with the reasons why the ecological footprints have significant difference among different areas in the world.

Hypothesis:
The more developed an area is, the higher ecological footprints it has.

Main body:
To start I will show the data from my group. The table below is the results of ecological footprints from Angola, China and the US.

Per Capita Ecological Footprint of Angola, China and US Part of footprint Carbon Food Housing Goods and service Total Earths Angola 0.74 2.49 0.41 1.15 4.79 0.31 China 4.05 5.76 1.97 5.71 17.49 1.11 US 91.43 65.74 31.58 57.66 246.41 6.35 Total

96.22 73.99 33.96 64.52 268.69

Table 1 the average of Ecological Footprint in three counties

Ecological Footprint of Huambo, Beijing and Atlanta Part of footprint Carbon Food Housing Goods and service Total Earths Huambo 0.4 2.9 0.4 1.4 5.08 0.32 Beijing 4.42 4.78 0.9 3.2 13.30 0.85 Atlanta 77.56 76.46 36.87 50.87 241.76 6.23 Total 82.78 84.14 38.17 55.47 260.14

Table 2 the Ecological Footprint in three particular areas

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Carbon Food Housing Goods and service Huambo Beijing Atlanta

Graph 1 the Ecological Footprint in three particular areas

Discussion:
From the observation, we can see that the ecological footprints of Atlanta student are much higher than the students in Huambo and Beijing. The amount of carbon footprint in Atlanta student is 77.56 which is seventeen times of Beijing student, one hundred and ninety-four times of Huambo student. The food footprint of Atlanta student is 76.46, more than seventeen times of Beijing student, twenty-six times of Huambo student. For housing footprint, the amount of Huambo student is only 1.08% of Atlanta student; the amount of Beijing student is 2.4% of Atlanta student. The amount of goods and service footprint of Atlanta student is thirty-six times of Huambo student, fifteen times of Beijing student. Although the amount of every single ecological footprint of Atlanta student is much higher than the others students from Beijing and Huambo; it doesnt mean that the Atlanta student living in a non-environmental friendly life. Compare with the US average, we get to know that except the housing footprint, the amount of other ecological footprints is lower. It means that the Atlanta student reduce the average of ecological footprints in her country. As the average of ecological footprint in Angola is really low, although the amount of ecological footprints are higher than average, the Huambo student still leads an ecologically conscientious life. If everyone lived like the Huambo student does, we would need only 0.32 Earths. The average of ecological footprint in China is 17.49 in total. Through the table 2 above we can know that the Beijing student is also living an ecologically conscientious lifestyle.

Evaluation:
Possible reasons for the differences:
1. Carbon greater reliance on fossil fuels, large per capita production of carbon waste (i.e. high energy use). By predicting, the student in Atlanta must use more fossil fuels than the students in Huambo and Beijing. 2. Food a meat-rich diet, large per capita consumption of food 3. Housing increased use of technology (such as Electronic Equipment) 4. Goods and service high levels of imported resources (which have high transport costs)

How to reduce ecological footprint:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Reducing amounts of resources used Recycling resources Reusing resources Improving efficiency of resource use Reducing amount of pollution produced Improving technology to increase carrying capacity Importing more resources from other countries Reducing population to reduce resource use

Limitations:
The Ecological Footprint is not a precise measure of ecological sustainability. While it is perhaps the best estimate to date, it is important to recognize its limitations. In general, the Footprint underestimates the impact of human activities on the biosphere. Any applications of the Footprint methodology must keep this perspective in mind. Because it focuses on renewable resources, the Footprint provides limited information about most non-renewable resources and their impact on ecosystems (with the exception of fossil fuel impacts which it partially addresses).

Conclusion:
According to Human Development Report 2011, the HDI (human development index) rank of Angola is 148, the rank of China is 101, and US is 4. As you can see from the graph, the ecological footprint of Atlanta student is much higher than the other two students from Beijing and Huambo. The possible reasons are list above. There is a obvious positive relationship between the development rank and the amount of ecological footprint. Therefore, the hypothesis is valid.