Post on 09-Apr-2018
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
1/33
THE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT
IMPLICATIONS AND IMPERATIVESFOR THE CITY OF CAPE TOWN
DISCUSSION PAPERS WORKSHOP
Wednesday 21 January, 2009 | Tygerberg Nature Reserve
Yvonne Hansen
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
2/33
BACKGROUND
The first EF approximation for Cape Town Barrie Gasson (2002) Metabolic inputs and outputs
Update this approximation Data collection (food, transport, housing, goods, services)
Discussion paper Focus on policy First principles
Strengths and weaknesses
The Ecological Footprint metric provides a vehicle to both measure
and communicate/educate environmental sustainability Sustainable consumption As a policy tool, however, it requires disaggregation into
consumption categories and/or policy relevant themes
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
3/33
OVERVIEW
Key footprint concepts and definitions
Natural capital biological capacity appropriated carrying
capacity
Exponential growth/demand ecological overshoot / fair
Earthshare Footprint accounting: component vs compound approaches
The Ecological Footprint of Cape Town
The first approximation (2002) based on a metabolic /
component approach
A revision based on a compound/hybrid approach
New work
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
4/33
ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINTS
EXPLAINED The Ecological Footprint metric compares the supply of
natural capital with human demand on it
Track progress, set targets and develop policies for sustainability
Calculate the area of biologically productive land and
sea required to support a given population To produce the renewable resources consumed
Assimilate the waste generated
A measure of the extent to which human economies stay
within the regenerative capacity of the biosphere
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
5/33
LAND USE TYPES
Cropland Required for growing crops for food, animal feed, fibre and oils (highest
bioproductivity)
Grazing land Pasture land required to raise livestock for meat, hides, wool and dairy product
Fishing grounds
Productive freshwater and marinefishing grounds
Forest area Timber products and fuelwood
Built-up land Land for infrastructure, transportation,
housing and industry
Carbon land Biologically productive area required
to assimilate CO2 eq from fossilfuel consumption (theoretical)
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
6/33
CONVERTING TO GLOBAL
HECTARES Equivalence factors and yield factors are used to convert actual
areas in hectares of different land types into their equivalentnumbers of global hectares
Yield factors
Show the extent to which
the local biocapacity of agiven land use is greater/smaller than the globalbiocapacity in that land use
Equivalency factors
Translate a specific land type(i.e. cropland, pasture, forest,fishing ground) into a universalunit of biologically productive area, a global hectare (gha)
For South Africa in 2003
Equivalence Factor Yield Factor[gha/ha] [-]
Primary Cropland 2.22 0.77
Marginal Cropland 1.80 0.92
Forest 1.35 1.92
Forest AWS 1.35 1.94
Forest NAWS 1.35 1.92
Permanent Pasture 0.49 0.79
Marine 0.36 1.60
Inland Water 0.36 0.03Built 2.22 0.77
Equivalence and Yield Factors
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
7/33
TERMINOLOGY
Ecological Footprint (demand) Expressed in units of global hectares gha
A global hectare is a hectare that is normalized to have the worldaverage productivity of all biologically productive land and waterin a given year
Biocapacity (supply) The capacity of ecosystems to produce useful biological
materials and to absorb waste materials generated by humansusing current management schemes and extraction technologies
Overshoot When the Ecological Footprint exceeds available biocapacity
Ecological deficit or Ecological reserve (+ve)
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
8/33
FOOTPRINTS, BIOCAPACITY,OVERSHOOT
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
9/33
FAIR EARTHSHARE? A fair earthshare is the amount of land each person would get if all
the ecologically productive land on Earth were divided evenly
among the present world population
This average earthshare stands at 1.8 gha per capita and is
expected to drop to 1.44 gha per capita by 2050
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
10/33
ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AND
POPULATION BY REGION (2003)
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
11/33
ACCOUNTING METHODS Compound
Top down
Calculates total consumption using trade flows at a Nationallevel: Production + Imports Exports
Based on international data sets published by the Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the
International Energy Agency (IEA), the UN Statistics Division(UN Commodity Trade Statistics Database UN Comtrade), andthe Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
Component Bottom-up Summing all relevant components of a populations resource
consumption and waste production Useful as a PR tool to calculate local or regional footprints
But requires sufficiently detailed data at these geographicalscales
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
12/33
COMPONENTLAND USEMATRIX
Carbonland
Built-upland
Cropland Pastureland
Forestland
ProductiveSea
Food 0.3410 %
Housing
Mobility
Goods
Services
Policy relevantthemes
EF expressed
as % of total orabsolute (per capita)value
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
13/33
Energy Land Cropland Pasture Forest Built area Fishing Total[gha/cap]
Food 0.07 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.64
.plant-based 0.27 0.00 0.28
.animal-based 0.07 0.10 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.43
Housing 0.35 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.10
.new construction 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08
.maintenance 0.00 0.00 0.00
.residential energy use 0.01 0.01
..electricity
..natural gas 0.34 0.34
..fuelwood 0.21 0.21
..fuel oil, kerosene, LPG, coal
Mobility 0.27 0.00 0.01 0.07
.passenger cars and trucks 0.22 0.00 0.22
.motorcycles 0.00 0.00
.buses 0.00 0.00
.passenger rail transport 0.00 0.00
.passenger air transport 0.00 0.00
.passenger boats 0.00 0.00
Goods 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.12
.appliances (not including operation energy) 0.00 0.00
.furnishing 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17
.computers and electrical equipment (not including operation energy)
.clothing and shoes 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02
.cleaning products 0.01 0.01
.paper products 0.05 0.05
.tobacco 0.00 0.00
.other misc. goods 0.00 0.00 0.00
Services 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02.water and sewage
.telephone and cable service
.solid waste
.financial and legal 0.00 0.00
.medical 0.00 0.00 0.00
.real estate and rental lodging
.entertainment 0.00 0.00
.Government
..non-military, non-road
..military
.other misc. services 0.00 0.00
Unidentified 0.48 -0.00 0.00 0.00
Total (gha/cap) 1.46 0.38 0.23 0.12 0.05 0.05 2.29
SOUTH AFRICAS LAND USE
MATRIX
Total EF= 2.29 gha/capita
Policy relevantthemes
Energy contribution~ 64%
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
14/33
SA EF SUMMARY
Ecological Footprint (Demand) Biological Capacity (Supply)
Values are in 1000 global hectares
Animal Grazing 10,221 32,746 Pasture
Fish 2,157 9,355 Fishing Grounds
Forest Products 5,461 23,257 Forests
Crops 17,225 23,718 Cropland
Built up area 2,392 2,354 Infrastructure
Sequestering CO2 63,295
Total Footprint 103,157 91,430 Total Biocapacity
Ecological Reserve(Deficit): (11,727)
Net Exports (Net Imports): 45,545
Performance IndicatorsSouth Africa World
Footprint per capita (gha) 2.29 2.19
Capacity per capita (gha) 2.03 1.82
Demand to Supply Ratio: 1.13 1.21
Earths required if world lived like South Africa: 1.3 n/a
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
15/33
THE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT OF
CAPE TOWN
The first EF approximations for Cape Town Barrie Gasson (2002)
Metabolic inputs and outputs (Compound approach)
EF Cape Town equivalent tothe area of Western Cape
EF ~50x larger thanjuridictional area
EF ~160x larger thanbuilt footprint of CT
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
16/33
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
17/33
A COMPOUND APPROACH?
Starting point: South Africas National Footprint Accounts
Compareaverage Capetonians
consumption patternswith average SouthAfricans
Using demographic data; economic data; transportation;energy consumption; food etc.
Energy Land Cropland Pasture Forest Built area Fishing Total[gha/cap]
Food 0.07 0.37 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.64.plant-based 0.27 0.00 0.28
.animal-based 0.07 0.10 0.22 0.00 0.05 0.43
Housing 0.35 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.10
.new construction 0.04 0.00 0.04 0.08
.maintenance 0.00 0.00 0.00
.residential energy use 0.01 0.01
..electricity
..natural gas 0.34 0.34
..fuelwood 0.21 0.21
..fuel oil, kerosene, LPG, coal
Mobility 0.27 0.00 0.01 0.07.passenger cars and trucks 0.22 0.00 0.22.motorcycles 0.00 0.00
.buses 0.00 0.00
.passenger rail transport 0.00 0.00
.passenger air transport 0.00 0.00
.passenger boats 0.00 0.00Goods 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.12
.appliances(not includingoperation energy) 0.00 0.00
.furnishing 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.17
.computers and electrical equipment(not includingoperation energy)
.clothing and shoes 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02
.cleaning products 0.01 0.01
.paper products 0.05 0.05
.tobacco 0.00 0.00
.other misc. goods 0.00 0.00 0.00
Services 0.12 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02
.water and sewage
.telephone and cable service
.solid waste
.financial and legal 0.00 0.00
.medical 0.00 0.00 0.00
.real estate and rental lodging
.entertainment 0.00 0.00
.Government..non-military, non-road
..military
.other misc. services 0.00 0.00Unidentified 0.48 -0.00 0.00 0.00
Total (gha/cap) 1.46 0.38 0.23 0.12 0.05 0.05 2.29
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
18/33
A COMPOUND APPROACH?
Food 35%
Mobility 19% Housing 17%
Unidentified 14%
Goods 9%
Services 5%
Energy58%
Cropland 18% Pasture 12%
Forest 7%
Fishing 3%
Built land 2%
Ecological Footprint (Western Cape) = 3.34gha/cap
COMPONENT LAND USE
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
19/33
ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT AND
POPULATION BY REGION (2003)
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
20/33
EF DISTRIBUTIONBY INCOME LEVEL
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
Income deciles (South Africa)
Footprint2003
globalhe
ctares
perperson
World =1.8
SA = 2.29
WC = 3.34
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
21/33
THE EF IN POLICY MAKING:
CARDIFF
A collaborative project tomeasure Cardiff'sEcological Footprint
This study demonstrated
where Cardiff's ecologicalfootprint was heaviest, andhighlighted areas ofconcern for the future
Objective: to maintainCardiffs EF at 2001 levels
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
22/33
CARDIFF EF 5.59 gha/cap
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
23/33
OUTCOMES: CARDIFF STUDY
The 'big hitters' : consumption of food and drink, passengertransport, energy use and production of municipal waste
Food recommendations
Shift towards fresh unprocessed foods
Increase consumption of organic foods Reduction in food waste at source
Energy recommendations
Requires dramatic shift away from fossil fuels towards renewableenergy in the domestic housing sector
Large scale energy efficiency measures in existing stock Transport recommendations
Car travel to be significantly reduced via demand management
More sustainable alternatives provided
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
24/33
OUTCOMES: CARDIFF STUDY
Air travel Massive impacts of air travel should be acknowledged in the
City's approach to economic development and tourism
Methods sought to offset carbon impacts
Physical developments Planning should consider lifetime ecological costs as well as
immediate impact on the footprints of waste, infrastructure,
energy and transport
Waste
Reduction at source
Policies implemented to reduce paper and card and managecompostables
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
25/33
CLOSURE
The Ecological Footprint metric provides a vehicle toboth measure and communicate environmentalsustainability
As a policy tool, however, it requires disaggregation intoconsumption categories and/or policy relevant themes
As one author suggests: one cannot infer much on the basis of the EF alone, neither
what is the main problem nor what might be adequate policysolutions to the problem. A decomposition type of approach isneeded, which distinguishes between population density,consumption and production of goods and services (per capita)
and unsustainable land use associated with each type of good orservice. This implies a logical and complete system of multiple,complementary indicators
The EF is one of these
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
26/33
A note on water
An estimate of the EF of water was included in the firstapproximation SA is a water scarce country
Policy relevant
Estimated as reservoir catchment areas
However, water is treated differently in the EF methodology Because, although freshwater is a natural resource and related to many
of the biospheres critical goods and services, it is not itself a materialmade by a biologically productive area
I.e. Ecosystems do not create water in the same manner as timber, fish,or fibre products
Therefore, the Footprint of a given quantity of water cannot becalculated with yield values in the same manner as a quantity of crop orwood product
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
27/33
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
28/33
Debtors and Creditors
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
29/33
How do countries compare?
EF < BioCEcological ReserveBut BioC decliningrapidlyEF stable
TanzaniaSwitzerlandMorocco
EF > BioCEcological DeficitEF increasing
BioC ~stable
EF >= BioC
Ecological DeficitBioC decreasingEF ~stable
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
30/33
Benefits of regional/city footprints
Main aim of EF studies has been to raise publicawareness on sustainability and consumptionissues Good visualisation tool
Aggregated sustainability indicator
However, its use to support policy making isincreasing Monitor and manage natural capital
Set targets and monitor progress, particularly wherethe EF is disaggregated into consumptioncategories/components
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
31/33
A Compound Approach?
To demonstrate:
Simple heuristic: Capetonians consumesapproximately 15% of the countrys resources
while accounting for only 10% of the population The exception Energy where Cape Town has a less
energy intensive economy compared to other regionsin SA (mining, minerals processing etc.)
Biocapacity not scaled
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
32/33
Crop Pasture Sea Forest Buil t Energy Total EF Biocapacity
EF South Africa 2006
(2003 data)
(pop: 45 Million)
0.38 0.23 0.05 0.17 0.05 1.35 2.30 2.0
EF Cape Town 2006 0.73 0.44 0.10 0.32 0.10 1.35 3.04
24% 14% 3% 11% 3% 44%
Cape Towns EF (summary)
Ecological deficit (3.0 2.0 = 1.0)
Big contributors
Energy 44%
Food 41%
And so can begin to engage policy makers
8/8/2019 Sustainable Futures: Ecological Footprint Presentation
33/33