ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT. What exactly is an ecological footprint?
Hong Kong Ecological Footprint Report 2008awsassets.wwfhk.panda.org/downloads/wwf_hong_kong...HOnG...
24
Hong Kong Ecological Footprint Report 2008 Living Beyond Our Means
Transcript of Hong Kong Ecological Footprint Report 2008awsassets.wwfhk.panda.org/downloads/wwf_hong_kong...HOnG...
Hong Kong Ecological Footprint Report 2008 Living Beyond Our Means
Foreword 1
ExecutiveSummary 2
Introduction 3
Evidence
TheGlobalContext:Humanity’sEcologicalFootprint 4
The Ecological Footprint of the Asia-Pacific Region 6
China’sEcologicalFootprintandBiocapacity 7
HongKong’sEcologicalFootprintandBiocapacity 8
TurningtheTide
TheGlobalDevelopmentChallenge 10
PathsfortheFuture 12
HongKong:TransformationtoSustainability 14
Data
Frequently Asked Questions 16
TechnicalNotes 18
References 20
Acknowledgements 21
CONTENTS
WWFisoneoftheworld’slargestandmost
experiencedindependentconservationorganizations,
withalmost5millionsupportersandaglobalnetwork
activeinover100countries.WWF’smissionistostop
thedegradationoftheplanet’snaturalenvironment
andtobuildafutureinwhichhumansliveinharmony
withnature.
WWFHongKonghasbeenworkingsince1981to
ensureabetterenvironmentforpresentandfuture
generationsinHongKongthroughtheimplementation
ofawiderangeoffocusedconservationand
environmentaleducationprogrammesinHong
KongandsouthernChina.Programmesinclude
Climate,Footprint,Terrestrial&ConservationPolicy,
Freshwater&WetlandsandMarine.
GlobalFootprintNetworkiscommittedtofostering
aworldinwhichallpeoplehavetheopportunityto
livesatisfyingliveswithinthemeansofoneplanet.
OurmissionistoadvancetheuseoftheEcological
Footprint,ascience-basedsustainabilitytoolthat
measureshowmuchoftheEarth’slivingresources
weuse,howmuchwehaveandwhouseswhat.Our
workseekstomaketheplanet’secologicallimits
acentralconsiderationatalllevelsofpolicyand
decisionmaking.
GlobalFootprintNetworkHeadquarters
312ClayStreet,Suite300
Oakland, CA 94607-3510 USA
www.footprintnetwork.org
Authors
GlobalFootprintNetwork
ShivaNiazi
Steven Goldfinger
MeredithStechbart
Anders Reed
Sarah Rizk
WWFHongKong
ClarusChu
AndyCornish
MonikaFung
KarenHo
AgnesTsang
LauraWeeks
WilliamYu
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 �
FOREWORD
Therecentdownturnintheglobaleconomy
isastarkreminderoftheconsequencesof
livingbeyondourmeans.Butthepossibilityof
economicrecessionpalesincomparisonto
theloomingecologicalcreditcrunch.
We,thesevenmillionpeopleinHongKong,
aresomewhatdistancedfromthenatural
resourcesonwhichourlivelihoodsdepend.
Some40percentofHongKong’spopulation
live above the 14th floor; many of us have not
experienced first hand the wonder and beauty
ofthenaturalworld.However,everythingwe
consume,andallouractions,asindividuals
andcollectivelyasacity,haveanimpacton
thestateofourplanet’snaturalresources.
Ourlivelihoods,andindeedourlives,depend
ontheservicesprovidedbytheEarth’s
naturalsystems,whichincludesupplyingus
with fresh air, water and food, fiber and timber,
andrecyclingandabsorbingourwaste.The
Living Planet Report 2008tellsusthatweare
consumingtheresourcesthatunderpinthose
servicesmuchtoofast–fasterthantheycan
bereplenished.Andourdemandsonthe
planetareaccelerating.Itisnowforecasted
thatwewouldneedtheresourcesoftwo
PlanetEarthsby2030.
Everyprudentpersonknowsthatyoumust
preservecapitalandliveontheinterest.Ifyou
drawoncapital,yourcapacityforgenerating
interest will diminish. Ultimately, if you keep
drawingoncapitaltofundanevermore
excessivelifestyle,youwillgobroke.Aswith
householdeconomics,sowithEarth’snatural
resources:Itisanironrule.
HongKongwillalwaysbean“ecological
debtor”,whereweneedmoreresources
than our land and sea mass can sustain; we
willalwayshavean“EcologicalFootprint”
thatextendsbeyondourterritory.Thisputs
usinavulnerableposition,sinceourfood,
fuel,waterandotherresourcesmustbe
imported, sometimes from far afield. As
resourcedemandaroundtheworldcontinues
togrowandresourcesbecomescarce,our
dependencyonexternalbiocapacityposes
considerablerisk.Wecanreducethese
risksbyreducingourFootprint:byincreasing
efficiency and reducing consumption.
Apartfromactionswecantakewithinour
territory,HongKongcanalsoaffectchange
throughourregionalreach:forexample
throughthewayweoperateourfactorieson
theMainland,orbyinsistingonenvironmental
standardsinthecompaniesweinvestinor
lendto.
ThisHong Kong Ecological Footprint Report
2008willprovidethebenchmarktotrack
ourshiftinconsumptionandthesizeofour
EcologicalFootprint.WWFHongKongwill
producethisreporteverytwoyears,from
which trends can be identified and actions
proposed.
Weknowwheretostart.Thebiggest
contributortoHongKong’sFootprintisthe
wayinwhichwegenerateanduseenergy:
climate-changingemissionsnowmakeup
80percentofouroverallfootprint.Thus
bymovingtoalowcarboneconomy(as
recommended by the HKSAR Chief Executive
inhis2008-2009PolicyAddress),by
developingacomprehensiveenergystrategy
bothonthesupplyanddemandsidewhilst
also promoting efficient building design and
energy use, Hong Kong can make significant
stridestowardsreducingouroverallFootprint.
This Report also proposes solutions in the
five main areas of Hong Kong’s Ecological
Footprintandbiocapacity,suggestingpaths
forasustainablefuture.WWFisworkingwith
theHongKongGovernmentandleadingHong
KongcompaniestoreduceFootprint,cut
carbonemissions,andpromotesustainability
in other sectors, such as fisheries and forests.
Sustainabledevelopmentcombinesmoral
obligationwitheconomicimperative.Themain
message of this Report is that we are living
beyondourmeans,andthatthechoiceseach
ofusmakestodaywillshapethepossibilities
forthegenerationswhichfollowus.
MarkusShaw
Chairman,WWFHongKong
� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
Withgrowingglobalfoodshortagesandprice
hikes,lossofcroplandfromsalinization,
depletion of overharvested fisheries, and
theimpactofclimatechangeonagricultural
productivity,itisclearthathumanwellbeingis
notseparablefromecologicalhealth.Human
economiesandendeavours,inordertomake
lastingprogress,musttakeintoaccountthe
realityofecologicalconstraints.Thismeans
knowingbothhuman’sdemandforecological
resources,andtheEarth’sabilitytomeetthis
demand.
TheEcologicalFootprintisaresource
accountingtoolthatmakesthismeasurement
possible.ThisreportdiscussesHongKong
SAR’s current Ecological Footprint within both
aglobalandregionalcontext.Italsobuildson
the CCiCED–WWF Report on the Ecological
FootprintinChinathatwasreleasedearlier
in2008.However,theHongKongresults
reportedherearebasedonmorerecent
data and reflect a number of improvements
intheEcologicalFootprintmethodology(see
TechnicalNotes).
Ascompetitionoverlimitedecosystem
resourcesandservicesincreases,howcan
HongKongmaintainarobusteconomyand
thewell-beingofitspopulation?
This report finds that:
• The Asia-Pacific region is home to more
thanhalfoftheworld’spopulation,who
usemorethan40percentoftheplanet’s
availablebiologicalcapacity.
• Focusingonindividuallifestyle,Hong
Kong’sEcologicalFootprintin2005was
4.4globalhectaresperperson.Thisis
morethandoublethe2.1globalhectares
ofbiocapacityavailableperpersononthe
planet.
• HongKong’spercapitaEcologicalFootprint
in2005rankedasthe29thhighestwhen
comparedtotheFootprintsofthe150
countriesintheworldwithpopulations
greaterthanonemillion.AnaverageHong
Kongresident’sFootprintwasmorethan
twiceaslargeasthe2.1globalhectares
averageintherestofChina.
• HongKong’sconsumptionrequiresmore
than250timesthebiologicalcapacityof
itslandandseaarea.Morethanthree-
quartersofHongKong’sFootprintcomes
fromcarbondioxideemissionsfromtheuse
offossilfuels.
• Hong Kong covers its significant ecological
deficit in part by importing biological
capacity,intheformofnaturalresources,
fromothernations.In2005,HongKong’s
net Footprint of import was 17.6 million
globalhectares,58percentofitstotal
Footprint.Thisisapproximatelyequaltothe
biologicalcapacityofIreland.Anadditional
39percentofHongKong’sFootprintcomes
fromcarbondioxidethatisemittedtothe
atmospherefromwithinitsownborders.
• HongKong’sEcologicalFootprintis
connectedthroughtraderelationsto
manycountriesaroundtheworld.Hong
Kong’sprimarytradepartnerisitshome
countryofChina.Ananalysisofselected
tradedproductssuggeststhatHong
Kongimportsmetals,minerals,foodand
plasticproductsfromcountriessuchas
Japan, Korea and the United States and
exportsmanufacturedproducts,electrical
machineryandmetals.
• ThreefactorsdeterminethesizeofHong
Kong’stotalEcologicalFootprint:its
population,consumptionperperson,and
theresource-andwaste-intensityofthe
goodsandservicesconsumed.
• Twocomplementaryapproachesfor
reducing Hong Kong’s ecological deficit that
canbepursuedinparallelare
EXECUTiVE SUMMARY
(1)makingchangesthatarerelatively
cheap,easyandfast,suchasswitchingto
energy efficient lighting, and (2) investing
ininfrastructurethatwillmaximizewell-
beingwhileminimizingfuturedemandfor
resources.
•Government,companiesandindividualsall
haveimportantrolestoplayinHongKong’s
movementtowardssustainability.
• Carbon emissions and overfishing
contribute significantly to Hong Kong’s
unsustainablelevelsofconsumption.These
canbeaddressedinmanyways,including
regulations, efficient improvements and
carefulsourcing.
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 �
inT
RO
DU
CT
iOn
Figure 1: raTio oF HumaniTy’s ecological FooTprinT To global biocapaciTy, 1961-2005
Figure 2: raTio oF Hong Kong’s ecological FooTprinT To iTs biocapaciTy, 1961 - 2005
Eco
log
ical
Fo
otp
rin
t (n
um
ber
of
pla
net
Ear
ths)
Nu
mb
er o
f H
on
g K
on
gs
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005
Ecological Footprint
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
Biocapacity(equal to one Hong Kong)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
1961 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002 2005
Inthelastcentury,itwasgenerallyassumed
thatglobaleconomicgrowthislimitedonly
by human innovation, with the finite nature
oftheplanet’sresourcesrarelyconsidered.
However,withatwo-foldincreasein
world population and five-fold increase
inenergyconsumptionoverthepast40
years,ecologicallimitshavebecomemore
obviousastheyincreasinglydeterminewhich
humanendeavorswillsucceed.Manyofthe
challengestheworldisfacing,fromclimate
changeandfoodshortagestolarge-scale
ecosystemcollapse,canonlybeaddressed
bymakingecologicallimitsacentral
considerationinthedecisionssocietymakes
bothindividuallyandcollectively.
TheEcologicalFootprintisaresource
accountingtoolthatcanrevealtheselimits
bycomparinghumandemandontheEarth’s
regenerativecapacitywiththeavailable
supply.Itdoesthisbysummingtheareaof
cropland, grazing land, forest and fishing
grounds required to produce the food, fibre
andtimberhumanityconsumes,toabsorb
thewasteemittedwhenitusesenergy,and
toprovidespaceforinfrastructure.Itallows
decisionmakersatanyscaletounderstand
howmuchcapacitytheyandothersareusing,
wherethiscapacityislocated,andifitis
sufficient to meet these demands.
By2005,withthegrowthinworldpopulation
andindividualconsumption,humanitywas
usingresources30percentfasterthanthe
planetcouldregeneratethem(Figure1).This
globalovershootmeansthathumanityis
depletinganddegradingthebiologicalcapital
onwhichitseconomydepends.
Inrespondingtothisnewreality,what
strategieswillgovernmentsadoptwhen
confrontingecologicallimits?Howwillglobal
trendsinresourceavailabilityshapemarkets
and financial centers? What decisions will
individualsmaketoensureresourceswillbe
availablefortheirchildrenandgrandchildren?
Withmorethan50percentoftheglobe’s
populationandapproximately20percentof
its biological capacity, what the Asia-Pacific
regiondecidestodowillplayacrucialrole
indetermininghumanity’sfuture.China’s
demandontheEarth’sbiologicalcapacityis
already on par with that of the United States.
Hong Kong, a major Chinese city and financial
capitalwithrelativelylittleproductivearea,
iscurrentlyusingapproximately250times
its own biological capacity (Figure 2). Using
theEcologicalFootprint,thisreportanalyzes
HongKong’sdemandonnaturalcapital,
placingitinaregionalandglobalcontext.It
thenlooksatvariousstrategiesHongKong
mightconsidertohelpreduceovershoot,while
maintainingitsfutureeconomichealthandthe
well-beingofitscitizens.
inTRODUCTiOn
Figure 1: Humanity’s ecological Footprint. Humanconsumptionhasgrownoverthelast40years,withglobaldemandforbiologicalcapacityexceedingsupplyby30percent.
Figure 2: Hong Kong’s ecological Footprint. TheresidentsofHongKongusemorethan250timesthebiocapacityofHongKong’sownecosystems.In2005,HongKonghadaFootprintof30.2millionglobalhectaresandabiocapacityofonly117thousandglobalhectares.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Uni
ted
Ara
b E
mira
tes
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
of A
mer
ica
Kuw
ait
Den
mar
k
Aus
tral
ia
New
Zea
land
Can
ada
Nor
way
Est
onia
Irel
and
Gre
ece
Spa
in
Uru
guay
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Fin
land
Bel
gium
Sw
eden
Sw
itzer
land
Aus
tria
Fra
nce
Japa
n
Isra
el
Italy
Om
an
Mac
edon
ia
Slo
veni
a
Por
tuga
l
Ho
ng
Ko
ng
Liby
a
Ger
man
y
Sin
gapo
re
Net
herla
nds
Pol
and
Tur
kmen
ista
n
Bel
arus
Rus
sia
Kor
ea R
epub
lic
Nam
ibia
Bot
swan
a
Hun
gary
Mon
golia
Latv
ia
Mex
ico
Kaz
akhs
tan
Slo
vaki
a
Par
agua
y
Cro
atia
Lith
uani
a
Pan
ama
Leba
non
Chi
le
Bos
nia
Her
zego
vina
Rom
ania
Ven
ezue
la
Bul
garia
Tur
key
Wo
rld
Ukr
aine
Iran
Sau
di A
rabi
a
Ser
bia
and
Mon
tene
gro
Arg
entin
a
Sud
an
Mal
aysi
a
Bra
zil
Cos
ta R
ica
Mau
ritiu
s
Alb
ania
Ecu
ador
Aze
rbai
jan
Tha
iland
Trin
idad
and
Tob
ago
Bol
ivia
Ch
ina
Sou
th A
fric
a
Syr
ia
Nic
arag
ua
Bur
kina
Fas
o
Mau
ritan
ia
Uzb
ekis
tan
Col
ombi
a
Hon
dura
s
Tun
isia
Cub
a
Jord
an
Cha
d
Pap
ua N
ew G
uine
a
Egy
pt
Alg
eria
Nig
er
Mal
i
El S
alva
dor
Cen
tral
Afr
ican
Rep
Per
u
Kor
ea D
PR
P
Gua
tem
ala
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic
Gha
na
Arm
enia
Som
alia
Uga
nda
Sen
egal
Eth
iopi
a
Nig
eria
Iraq
Gab
on
Gui
nea
Cam
eroo
n
Vie
tnam
Mol
dova
Rep
ublic
Gam
bia
Erit
rea
Tanz
ania
Mor
occo
Zim
babw
e
Mya
nmar
Kyr
gyzs
tan
Jam
aica
Mad
agas
car
Leso
tho
Geo
rgia
Ken
ya
Laos
Sri
Lank
a
Ben
in
Bhu
tan
Indo
nesi
a
Cam
bodi
a
Moz
ambi
que
Yem
en
Ang
ola
Gui
nea-
Bis
sau
Indi
a
Côt
e D
`ivoi
re
Phi
lippi
nes
Libe
ria
Bur
undi
Pak
ista
n
Togo
Rw
anda
Sie
rra
Leon
e
Zam
bia
Nep
al
Sw
azila
nd
Tajik
ista
n
Con
go D
em R
ep
Ban
glad
esh
Con
go
Hai
ti
Afg
hani
stan
Mal
awi
Carbon Uptake Land
Fishing Ground
Built-up Land
Grazing Land
In 2005 the globally available biocapacity was 2.1 hectares per person
Cropland
Forest Land
� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
TheEcologicalFootprintisawidelyused
measureofhumanity’sdemandonnature.A
nation’sEcologicalFootprintisthesumofthe
landandseaareausedtoprovidethefood,
fibre and timber resources it consumes, to
absorbthewasteitemits,andtolocateits
infrastructure.Becausepeopleuseresources
andecologicalservicesfromallaroundthe
world,thearearequiredtoprovidethem,
regardlessofwhereitislocated,isincludedin
theEcologicalFootprint.
In2005,theglobalEcologicalFootprintwas
17.4billionglobalhectares,or2.7global
hectaresperperson(aglobalhectareisa
hectarewithworld-averageproductivity).
Thisdemandonnaturecanbecompared
totheplanet’sbiocapacity,theamountof
biologicallyproductivearea—cropland,
grazing land, forest, fishing grounds, land
forcarbondioxideuptake—availableto
meethumandemand.In2005,theplanet’s
totalbiocapacitywas13.4billionglobal
hectares,or2.1globalhectaresperperson.
Demand therefore exceeded supply by 0.6
globalhectaresperperson.This30percent
overshootmeantthatittooktheEarthalmost
ayearand4monthstoregeneratethe
resourceshumanityusedin2005.
The average Footprint varies significantly by
regionandcountry.Manyofthecountries
withthelargestperpersonFootprintsare
foundinNorthAmericaandWesternEurope.
THE GlOBAl COnTEXT: HUMAniTY’S ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT
Figure 3: ecological FooTprinT per person, by counTry, 2005
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Uni
ted
Ara
b E
mira
tes
Uni
ted
Sta
tes
of A
mer
ica
Kuw
ait
Den
mar
k
Aus
tral
ia
New
Zea
land
Can
ada
Nor
way
Est
onia
Irel
and
Gre
ece
Spa
in
Uru
guay
Cze
ch R
epub
lic
Uni
ted
Kin
gdom
Fin
land
Bel
gium
Sw
eden
Sw
itzer
land
Aus
tria
Fra
nce
Japa
n
Isra
el
Italy
Om
an
Mac
edon
ia
Slo
veni
a
Por
tuga
l
Ho
ng
Ko
ng
Liby
a
Ger
man
y
Sin
gapo
re
Net
herla
nds
Pol
and
Tur
kmen
ista
n
Bel
arus
Rus
sia
Kor
ea R
epub
lic
Nam
ibia
Bot
swan
a
Hun
gary
Mon
golia
Latv
ia
Mex
ico
Kaz
akhs
tan
Slo
vaki
a
Par
agua
y
Cro
atia
Lith
uani
a
Pan
ama
Leba
non
Chi
le
Bos
nia
Her
zego
vina
Rom
ania
Ven
ezue
la
Bul
garia
Tur
key
Wo
rld
Ukr
aine
Iran
Sau
di A
rabi
a
Ser
bia
and
Mon
tene
gro
Arg
entin
a
Sud
an
Mal
aysi
a
Bra
zil
Cos
ta R
ica
Mau
ritiu
s
Alb
ania
Ecu
ador
Aze
rbai
jan
Tha
iland
Trin
idad
and
Tob
ago
Bol
ivia
Ch
ina
Sou
th A
fric
a
Syr
ia
Nic
arag
ua
Bur
kina
Fas
o
Mau
ritan
ia
Uzb
ekis
tan
Col
ombi
a
Hon
dura
s
Tun
isia
Cub
a
Jord
an
Cha
d
Pap
ua N
ew G
uine
a
Egy
pt
Alg
eria
Nig
er
Mal
i
El S
alva
dor
Cen
tral
Afr
ican
Rep
Per
u
Kor
ea D
PR
P
Gua
tem
ala
Dom
inic
an R
epub
lic
Gha
na
Arm
enia
Som
alia
Uga
nda
Sen
egal
Eth
iopi
a
Nig
eria
Iraq
Gab
on
Gui
nea
Cam
eroo
n
Vie
tnam
Mol
dova
Rep
ublic
Gam
bia
Erit
rea
Tanz
ania
Mor
occo
Zim
babw
e
Mya
nmar
Kyr
gyzs
tan
Jam
aica
Mad
agas
car
Leso
tho
Geo
rgia
Ken
ya
Laos
Sri
Lank
a
Ben
in
Bhu
tan
Indo
nesi
a
Cam
bodi
a
Moz
ambi
que
Yem
en
Ang
ola
Gui
nea-
Bis
sau
Indi
a
Côt
e D
`ivoi
re
Phi
lippi
nes
Libe
ria
Bur
undi
Pak
ista
n
Togo
Rw
anda
Sie
rra
Leon
e
Zam
bia
Nep
al
Sw
azila
nd
Tajik
ista
n
Con
go D
em R
ep
Ban
glad
esh
Con
go
Hai
ti
Afg
hani
stan
Mal
awi
Carbon Uptake Land
Fishing Ground
Built-up Land
Grazing Land
In 2005 the globally available biocapacity was 2.1 hectares per person
Cropland
Forest Land
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 �
EV
iDE
nC
E
Hong Kong SAR’s Ecological Footprint in
2005was4.4globalhectaresperperson,
givingHongKongthe29thhighestFootprint
whencomparedto150nationsthatyear.For
HongKongandmanyhigh-incomenations,
thearearequiredtoabsorbcarbonemissions
comprisesthemajorityoftheirEcological
Footprint.
Figure 4: ecological Footprint by income group, over time.Theaveragedemandperpersoninhigh-incomenationshasnearlydoubled,whiletheEcologicalFootprintinmiddleandlow-incomenationshasremainedrelativelysteady.
Figure 4: ToTal ecological FooTprinT, For HigH, miDDle anD loW-income counTries, 1961-2005
0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
High-income countries
Middle-income countries
Low-income countries
Figure 3: ecological Footprint per person, by country, by land type.150nations,theworld,andHongKongareshownwiththeirEcologicalFootprintdividedintomajorlandtypes.Formosthigh-incomenations,thelargestportionoftheFootprint comes from carbon dioxide emissions; forlow-incomenations,fromcropland.
� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
Comparedtootherregionsoftheworld,
the Asia-Pacific region has a relatively low
EcologicalFootprintperperson(Figure5).
Thelargepopulationoftheregion,however,
givesitthelargesttotalEcologicalFootprint
intheworld.Onaglobalscale,theAsia-
Pacific region contains 55 percent of the
worldpopulationanddemands43percent
ofthetotalbiologicalcapacityoftheplanet
(Figure 6).
The Ecological Footprint of the Asia-Pacific
regionisnowtwiceaslargeasitsown
biological capacity. For comparison, in 1961,
theregion’stotalFootprintwasonly14
percentofworldbiocapacitydespitehaving
53percentofworldpopulation.Althoughthe
regions’productivecapacityhasgrownover
thepast40years,particularlythroughthe
greenrevolutionandoveralleconomicgrowth,
demandforecologicalserviceshassimply
outstrippedsupply.
Whiletheregionasawholehasentered
ecological deficit, there is large variation in the
magnitudeoftheFootprintwithintheAsia-
Pacific region. While the average Australian
liveson7.8globalhectareswithanecological
reserve of 7.6 global hectares, the average
Bangladeshi uses only 0.6 global hectares but
lives with an ecological deficit of 0.3 global
hectares.TheaverageresidentofHong
Konguses4.4globalhectaresoftheplanet’s
biocapacity.
China and india make up 68 percent of
the Asia-Pacific regional population and
66 percent of its total Footprint. While the
Footprintperpersonofbothnationsiswell
belowtheglobalaverage,bothareoperating
withFootprintstwicetheirownbiocapacities.
Howisitpossibleforthemajorityofaregion
tobelivingonmoreresourcesthantheyhave
within their borders? The Asia-Pacific region
asawholecompensatesforitsecological
deficit of 2.8 billion global hectares in two
ways: first, by liquidating the biological capital
withintheregionandsecond,byimporting
resourcesandusingthebiologicalcapacityof
othercountriesandtheglobalcommons.
Figure 5: ecological Footprint by region.AlthoughNorthAmericahasthehighestFootprintperperson,thelargepopulationoftheAsia-Pacific region gives Asia-Pacific the largest total EcologicalFootprintofallglobalregions.
Figure 6: asia-pacific’s use of world biocapacity. The Asia-Pacific region’s populationandEcologicalFootprintcontinuetogrow.In2005,theregion’saggregateFootprinthad nearly tripled since 1961.
Figure 5: ecological FooTprinT by region, 1961-2005 Figure 6: asia paciFic’s use oF WorlD biocapaciTy, 1961-2005
THE ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT OF THE ASiA-PACiFiC REGiOn
Population (in millions)
2005 world average biocapacity per person; 2.1 global hectares
Europe (Non-EU)
Europe (EU)
North America
Asia-Pacific
Latin America and the Caribbean
Middle East and Central Asia
Africa
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
330 487 240 553 366 3,562 902
Asia Pacific use of world biocapacity
Asia Pacific share of world population
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005
Per
cen
tag
e o
f to
tal
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 �
EV
iDE
nC
E
ThestoryofChinaoverthepast40years
is the story of growth. From 1961 to 2005,
China’spopulationdoubledasdiditsper
personEcologicalFootprint,andChina’stotal
Footprintincreasedbyafactoroffour.China
and the United States each used 21 percent
ofglobalbiocapacityin2005,morethanany
othercountry.
Withitshighdemand,Chinaisfortunateto
haveconsiderablebiocapacitywithinitsown
borders.Chinahassubstantialamountsof
croplandbiocapacity,rankingfourthamong
nationsformostcroplandbiocapacityand
outstrippingthecroplandbiocapacityofthe
EU by 647 million global hectares. its grazing
landbiocapacityis2.3timesthatofthe
United States and China’s forest biocapacity
makes up nearly half of the Asia-Pacific
region’soverallforestbiocapacity.
Sustainabilityrequiresthatdemandremain
withintheregenerativecapacityofnature.
Ifanycountryusesmorethanitsown
ecosystemscanprovide,itrunsanecological
deficit. This deficit is only made possible
byrelyingonbiologicalcapacityfromother
nationsviaimportsorviaemissionsto
theglobalcommons,orbyoverharvesting
ecosystemsthatliewithinacountry’sown
borders.
Sincetheearly1970s,Chinahasrunan
ecological deficit. its deficit in cropland has
narrowed,butin2005Chinastillimported
anequivalentof541millionglobalhectares
ofcroplandbiocapacity.Chinathatyearstill
had ecological reserves in forest and fishing
ground,butthesereservesaregenerally
shrinkingovertime.Asmallreserveingrazing
landbiocapacityinpreviousyearsbecamea
deficit in 2005.
The most significant change over this time
hasbeentherapidincreaseinChina’scarbon
Footprint.Thisparallelsarapidincreaseof
almost22-foldinoverallenergyconsumption
inChinaoverthepast40years.Perperson,
since1971,China’scarbondioxideemissions
have increased more than five-fold. Given
China’srelativelyhighcarbonemissionsper
kilowattofelectricityproduction,reducing
theseemissionswillbeanimportantstep
towards shrinking China’s ecological deficit.
Figure 7: china’s use of world biocapacity,
1961-2005. China began demanding more
capacitythanitsownecosystemscouldsupport
in the late 1960s. The nation’s Footprint is now
morethantwiceitsbiocapacity.
Table 1: china’s total ecological Footprint
and biocapacity by land type, 2005.China
had an ecological deficit in all but two land types,
forest and fishing ground. Total biocapacity of
the five land types shown in the table comprises
the entire productive area of the world; thus land
whichuptakescarbonisaccountedforinother
biocapacitytotals.
Figure 7: cHina’s use oF WorlD biocapaciTy, 1961-2005
land types TotalEcologicalFootprint
(millions of gha)
Total biocapacity
(millions of gha)
Cropland 737.0 521.0
Grazingland 199.0 197.0
Forest 165.0 215.0
Carbonuptakeland 1,500.0 —
Built-upland 99.0 99.0
Fishingground 87.4 101.0
Total 2,790.0 1,133.0
Table 1: cHina’s ToTal ecological FooTprinT anD biocapaciTy per lanD Type, 2005
CHinA’S ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT AnD BiOCAPACiTY
Ecological Footprint
Biocapacity
Ecological reserve
Ecological debt
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s (m
illio
ns)
� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
HOnG KOnG’S ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT AnD BiOCAPACiTY
Figure 8: Hong Kong’s ecological FooTprinT by lanD Type, THree year averages, 1964-2005
Table 2: Hong Kong’s ToTal ecological FooTprinT anD biocapaciTy per lanD Type,2005
land types TotalEcologicalFootprint
(millions of gha)
Total biocapacity
(millions of gha)
Cropland 4.00 0.01
Pastureland 0.25 0.02
Forest 0.81 0.03
Carbonuptakeland 24.00 —
Built-upland 0.04 0.04
Fishingground 0.99 0.02
Total 30.00 0.12
At4.4globalhectaresperperson,Hong
Kong’saverageEcologicalFootprintisnearly
twicethatoftherestofChina.Itiscomparable
tothatofotherAsianurbancenterssuchas
Singapore.
Since 1965, Hong Kong’s per person
EcologicalFootprinthasmorethandoubled,
withthecarboncomponentincreasing
approximatelyseven-fold(Figure8).This
isdespiteHongKong’surbanlifestyle
providing some overall energy efficiencies
throughcompacthousingandtransportation
infrastructure.
ThedemandonthebiospherebyHongKong
residentsgoeswellbeyondwhatHongKong
itselfcanprovide.Ifeveryoneontheplanet
livedlikeanaverageHongKongresident,it
wouldrequirealittlemorethantwoEarths
toprovidetheresourcesbeingusedandto
absorbthewastesbeinggenerated.
IfHongKongresidentsweretodependsolely
onthebiologicalcapacityoftheirlandandsea
base,theywouldrequiremorethan250Hong
Kongs.ButlikeSingapore,inmoderntimes,
HongKong’sgrowingeconomyhasnever
beendependentonitsownlimitedbiocapacity.
Evenbythemid1940s,therewerefewforests
leftandsail-poweredjunkstraveledasfaras
Hainan island to fish. instead, its consumption
islargelydependentonthebiocapacityof
otherregionsandtheglobalcommons.Hong
Kong’s net import Footprint is 17.6 million gha,
nearly58percentofitstotalconsumption
Footprint(Table2).Anadditional39percent
ofHongKong’sFootprintcomesfromcarbon
dioxidethatisemittedtotheatmospherefrom
withinitsownborders.
MuchofHongKong’simportedbiocapacity
comesfromotherregionsofChina.Other
major trade partners include Pacific Rim
countriessuchasJapan,SouthKoreaandthe
United States (Table 3). Hong Kong’s major
importsincludemetalsandminerals,plastics,
andfood.Majorexports,whichincludere-
exports,consistofmanufacturedproducts,
electricalmachinery,andmetals.
Thishighlevelofdependenceontrade
hasimportantimplicationsforHongKong’s
economicsecurityandthefuturewell-being
ofitsresidents.Asresourcedemandaround
theworldcontinuestogrowandresources
becomeincreasinglyscarce,thisdegreeof
dependencyonexternalbiocapacityposes
considerablerisk.Tohelpoffsetsomeofthis
risk,HongKong’sgovernmentandresidents
canapplyaresourceaccountingsystem
suchastheEcologicalFootprinttobetter
understandthenatureandextentoftheir
demandon,andtheavailabilityofbiocapacity,
thendevelopstrategiesforinvestingin
infrastructureandencouraginglifestylesthat
arelessdependentontheuseofthesecritical
assets.
Carbon uptake land
Built-up land
Fishing ground
Grazing land
Forest
Cropland
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
Eco
log
ical
Fo
otp
rin
t (g
lob
al h
ecta
res
per
per
son
)
1964
- 19
66
1967
- 19
69
1970
- 19
72
1973
- 19
75
1976
- 19
78
1979
- 19
81
1982
- 19
84
1985
- 19
87
1988
- 19
90
1991
- 19
93
1994
- 19
96
1997
- 19
99
2000
- 20
02
2003
- 20
05
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 9
EV
iDE
nC
E
Table 3: Hong Kong’s FooTprinT oF imporTs From, anD eXporTs To, Top TraDe parTners,2005
Trading partner Footprint of imports (millions of gha)
Footprint of exports (millions of gha)
net Footprint of imports (millions of gha)
major products imported major products exported
China 42.88 56.25 -13.37Crude fertilizers and crude materials;
MiscellaneousmanufactureditemsPlastic materials; iron and steel
Japan 9.84 2.87 6.97 non-metallic mineral manufactures; Plastic materialsMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Republic of Korea 6.07 0.54 5.54 Plastic materials; iron and steelMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Thailand 4.53 0.54 3.98 Plastic materials; Cereals and cereal preparationsTextile yarn, fabrics, made up articles, etc.;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
United States of America 5.61 9.03 -3.42 Plastic materials; Fruit and vegetablesMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Malaysia 2.93 0.43 2.50 Plastic materials; Fixed vegetable oils and fatsCrude fertilizers and crude minerals;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Singapore 2.69 0.62 2.07 Plastic materials; Chemical elements and compoundsMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Indonesia 1.56 0.35 1.21Coal, coke and briquettes;
Textileyarn,fabrics,madeuparticlesMiscellaneous manufactured articles;Textileyarn,fabrics,madeuparticles
Australia 1.67 0.70 0.97 nonferrous metals; iron and steelMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Netherlands 1.56 0.67 0.89 Plastic materials; Chemical elements and compoundsMiscellaneous manufactured articles;
Electricalmachinery,apparatusandappliances
Million global hectaresMore than 25 10 – 25 5 – 101 – 5Less than 1 Hong Kong’s total imports Footprint = 98 million gha,
94% comes from the 20 countries indicated in the map.Hong Kong’s total exports Footprint = 80 million gha.95% goes to the 20 countries indicated in the map.
Million global hectaresMore than 25 10 – 25 5 – 101 – 5Less than 1
Figure 9a: imporTeD FooTprinT To Hong Kong From Top TraDe parTners, 2005 Figure 9b: eXporTeD FooTprinT From Hong Kong To Top TraDe parTners, 2005
10 HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
Theworldhaschangeddramaticallyoverthe
pastfortyyears.Manynations,includingthose
in the Asia-Pacific region, have experienced
rapideconomicgrowth,areductionin
poverty,andanimprovedqualityoflife.These
positivechanges,however,haveoftenbeen
accompaniedbyacorrespondingrisein
EcologicalFootprint.Aseconomiesdevelop
andmature,howwillhigherlivingstandards
bedecoupledfromresourcethroughputand
carbondioxideemissions?
Eachpersonalivetodayconsumesmoreon
averagethanapersondidfortyyearsago.
Butatthesametime,theamountofbiological
capacityavailableperpersonhasfallen,as
populationgrowthhasoutpacedincreasesin
theareaandyieldofproductiveecosystems.
Thisincreasedconsumptionanddecreased
perpersonbiocapacityhasledtogrowing
ecological deficits in many nations.
HongKong’sEcologicalFootprinttrends
overthepastfortyyearshavebeensimilar
toJapan’s.Bothwerealreadyecological
debtors by the 1960s, and experienced rising
prosperityandperpersonFootprintsuntilthe
1990s,whenthesestartedlevelingoff.Hong
KongandJapanbothhavehighperperson
incomeandarelativelylowpopulationgrowth
rate,andareindustrializedcountrieswithan
EcologicalFootprintdominatedbycarbon
emissions.
China’sFootprinthasdoubledoverthelast
fortyyears,alongwithincreasingprosperity
foritsaverageresident.Duringthesame
period,asitspopulationgrew,biocapacity
availableperpersoninthecountrydeclined.
AsChinacontinuestoindustrializeand
increasesitsconsumptionanddependence
onoutsideresources,itwillconfrontthe
challengeofsustainingitseconomicgrowth
whilefacingtighteningconstraintson
resources.
AustraliaandIndonesiabothhavean
ecologicalreserve,withbiocapacityexceeding
theirEcologicalFootprints.Australia’s
historicallyhighperpersonFootprintmay
beaccountedforinpartbytransportation
requirementsbetweenwidelyseparatedcities,
andbyitsrelativelyhighmeatconsumption.
DespitethishighFootprint,Australiacontinues
to have access to a significant, although
slowlydiminishing,reserveofbiocapacity.As
anindustrializedecologicalcreditornationwith
both natural and financial capital, Australia
mayhavemoreoptionsformaintaininga
viableeconomythanwillnationsalready
running ecological deficits.
Indonesia,amiddle-incomenation,hasa
modestFootprintthatisconvergingwithits
stillslightlygreaterbiocapacity.Becauseits
carbonFootprintisrelativelysmall,Indonesia’s
Footprintsuggestsaresourceconsumption
patternbasedmoreonmeetingbasicneeds
suchasfood,andlessondiscretionary
spending.Withconsiderableforestbiocapacity
stillremaining,adevelopingmarketforcarbon
THE GlOBAl DEVElOPMEnT CHAllEnGE
Figure 10: Hong Kong’s ecological FooTprinT, biocapaciTy anD gDp, 1961-2005
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
GDP
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
1962 1966 1970 1974 1978 1982 1986 1990 1994 1998 2002$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Per
cap
ita
GD
P (
in c
urr
ent
US
$)
creditsmayhelpprotectIndonesia’secological
assetswhileprovidingitwithanimportant
ongoingrevenuestream.
Theimpactofincreasingresourceconstraints
oneconomicviabilitydiffersamongnations,
dependingonfactorsthatincludepopulation
growth,consumptiongrowthandstrategic
managementofbiologicalassets.Carbon
emissions,andhowandwhentheywillbe
treatedunderinternationalagreements,arean
increasinglykeyfactorbothforhigh-income
countries,whosecarbonFootprintscomprise
a significant percentage of their overall
Footprints,andforindustrializingnations,
whereenergyresourcesplayakeyrolein
emergingfrompoverty.
Formostcountries,carbondioxideemittedas
aby-productofeconomicactivitiesiscurrently
dumpedintotheglobalcommonsofthe
atmosphereatnoeconomiccosttopolluters
otherthanthediffusedcosttoallthatresults
fromclimatechange.Asemittedcarbon
becomesacommoditytradedorregulated
byinternationaltreaties,theeconomic
consequencesofahighcarbonFootprint
willbecomeanincreasinglyimportant
considerationinthestrategiescountriesadopt
forimprovingthewell-beingoftheircitizens
whilemaintainingtherobustnessoftheir
economies.
Figures 10-14: ecological Footprint, biocapacity and gDp per person for Hong Kong, china, Japan, indonesia and australia, 1961-2005.
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 ��
TU
Rn
inG
TH
E T
iDE
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Per
cap
ita
GD
P (
in c
urr
ent
US
$)
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Per
cap
ita
GD
P (
in c
urr
ent
US
$)
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Per
cap
ita
GD
P (
in c
urr
ent
US
$)
Glo
bal
hec
tare
s p
er p
erso
n
Per
cap
ita
GD
P (
in c
urr
ent
US
$)
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
GDP
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
GDP
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
GDP
Biocapacity
Ecological Footprint
GDP
Figure 11: cHina’s ecological FooTprinT, biocapaciTy anD gDp, 1961-2005 Figure 12: Japan’s ecological FooTprinT, biocapaciTy anD gDp, 1961-2005
Figure 13: inDonesia’s ecological FooTprinT, biocapaciTy anD gDp, 1961-2005 Figure 14: ausTralia’s ecological FooTprinT, biocapaciTy anD gDp, 1961-2005
�� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
Ifhumanitycontinuesonitscurrenttrajectory,
even optimistic United nations projections
withmoderateincreasesinpopulation,food
and fibre consumption, and carbon dioxide
emissionssuggestthataround2030humanity
willdemandresourcesatmorethandouble
therateatwhichtheEarthcanregenerate
them.Thisdegreeofovershootrisksnotonly
thelossofbiodiversity,butalsodamageto
ecosystemsandtheirabilitytoprovidethe
resourcesandservicesonwhichhumanity
depends.Thealternativetothecurrent
trajectoryistoeliminateovershoot.
Withinthisglobalcontext,HongKonghas
importantdecisionstomakeregarding
resourceuseandanever-increasing
dependenceonbiocapacityfromoutsideof
theadministrativeregion.
Fivefactorsdeterminetheextentofglobal
overshoot, or a nation’s ecological deficit.
ThreeofthesefactorsshapetheEcological
Footprint:populationsize,theaverage
consumptionperpersoninthatpopulation,
andtheresourceandwasteintensityper
unitofconsumption.Twofactorsdetermine
biocapacity:theamountofproductivearea
available,andtheproductivityofthatarea.
1. The population Factor
Increasesinpopulationcanbeslowedand
eventuallyreversedbysupportingfamilies
inchoosingwhentohavechildren.Offering
womenaccesstosafeandaffordable
familyplanning,bettereducation,economic
opportunities,andhealthcareareproven
approachestoachievingthis.HongKong’s
populationgrowthrateiscurrentlylessthan
onepercent,buttotalpopulationmakesHong
Kongoneofthemostdenselypopulatedareas
in the world, with 6,303 people per square
kilometer.
2. The consumption Factor
Thepotentialforreducingconsumption
dependsinpartonanindividual’seconomic
situation.Whilepeoplelivingatorbelow
subsistencemayneedtoincreasetheir
consumptiontomoveoutofpoverty,thereare
many opportunities for more affluent people
toreduceconsumptionwhilestillimproving
theirqualityoflife.Withahighlevelofhuman
development as defined by the United nations,
andahighperpersonincome,HongKongis
well-positionedtoreduceitsFootprintwhile
enhancingitslifestyle.
Figure 15: Five factors that determine global overshoot.Inordertoreduceitsecologicaldeficit, Hong Kong can either increase its biocapacityorreduceitsEcologicalFootprint.
Figure 15: FooTprinT anD biocapaciTy FacTors THaT DeTermine global oversHooT
PATHS FOR THE FUTURE
Area
PopulationConsumption
per personResource and waste intensity
Ecological Footprint (DEMAND)
=x
x =x
BioproductivityBiocapacity(SUPPLY)
Gap between supply and demand: OVERSHOOT
2.1 gha per person (2005 global biocapacity)
2.7 gha per person (2005 global Footprint)
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 ��
TU
Rn
inG
TH
E T
iDE
3. The Technology Factor
Theamountofresourcesusedandwastes
emittedintheproductionofgoodsand
services can be significantly reduced.
Thiscanbeaccomplishedthroughenergy
conservation and efficiency in manufacturing
andinthehome,wasteminimization,
increased recycling, more fuel-efficient
vehicles,andareductioninthedistance
goodsaretransported.Businessandindustry
reacttogovernmentpoliciesthatpromote
resource efficiency and technical innovation
–wheresuchpoliciesareclearandlongterm
–aswellastoconsumerpressure.
4. The area Factor
Bioproductiveareacanbeextended:
non-productivelandscanbemadefertile
throughcarefulmanagement.Terracinghas
hadhistoricalsuccess,andirrigation,too,
canmakemarginallandsmoreproductive,
thoughthegainsmaynotpersist.Aboveall,
goodlandmanagementmustensurethat
bioproductiveareasarenotlost,forexample,
to urbanization, salinization or desertification.
5. The bioproductivity Factor
Theamountofresourcesproducedper
hectaredependsbothonthetypeof
ecosystemandthewayitismanaged.
Agriculturaltechnologiescanboost
productivity,butcanalsodiminishbiodiversity.
Energyintensiveagricultureandheavy
relianceonfertilizerandpesticidesmay
increaseyields,butatthecostofalarger
Footprint.Iftheseinputsimpoverishsoil,
yieldsmayultimatelybegintofall.
Figure 16: lifespan of people, assets and infrastructure.ThelonglifeofinfrastructuremeansthattheinfrastructureHongKonginvestsintodaywilldeteminelevelsofresourceusefordecades.
Figure 16: liFespan oF people, asseTs anD inFrasTrucTure
2005 2025 2045 2065 2085 2105 2125 2145 2165 2185 2205Year
25 - 40 years
20 - 50 years
30 - 75 years
30 - 75 years
32 - 82 years
50 - 100 years
20 - 100 years
50 - 150 yearsRailway, home, and dam
Wind power
Commercial building design
People (national averages)
Coal-powered power station
Bridge
Highway
Solar power
Inchoosinginvestmentsthatwillhelp
reduce its ecological deficit, there are two
complementarypathsthatHongKongcan
simultaneouslypursue:
path #1: invest in things that are quick
and easy to change.
Thisstrategyinvolvessolutionsthatare
simple,cheapandthepublicisreadyto
embrace.Investmentsincleantechnology,
such as energy efficient light bulbs, often
areabletoquicklyreduceFootprintintensity
withoutreducingthequalityoflifeofend
consumers,andcreatenewopportunities
forbusinesses.Thisstrategycanresultin
veryrapid,short-termgains,whilebuilding
momentumthatcanhelpsetsocietyonalow-
Footprintpath.
path #2: invest in things that change
slowly.
Reducing Hong Kong’s ecological deficit in
thelongrunwillrequiredecision-making
within a long-term framework (Figure 16).
Oftenthedecisionswiththelargestlong-
termFootprintimpactarenotthosethat
placethegreatestdemandontheplanet
today,butthosethatlockdevelopmentinto
anunsustainabletrack.Althoughhighways
maybecheaperintheshort-termtobuild
andmaintain,theconstructionofalightrail
systemmay,overthelong-term,resultin
amuchsmallertransportationFootprint.
Likewise,investmentsinpowergeneration
shouldbemindfulofthecarbonFootprint
thatwillaccumulateoverthelifespanofthe
facility.Today,proactivedecisionsabout
humanpopulationsizeandinfrastructure
developmentwillhavethemostenduringand
significant impacts on Hong Kong’s future
ecological deficit, and its ability to ensure the
well-beingofitsresidents.
Figure 16: liFespan oF people, asseTs anD inFrasTrucTure
�� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
HOnG KOnG: TRAnSFORMATiOn TO SUSTAinABiliTY
in his 2008-09 Policy Address, HKSAR’s
ChiefExecutiveembracedthechallenge
ofsustainabledevelopment.HongKongis
fortunate in having the financial resources to
meetthischallenge,totransformitselfintoa
trulymoderncitywhereitsresidentscanlive
wellonamodestEcologicalFootprint.Indoing
so,HongKongcanleadbyexample,providing
asustainabilityblueprintforothercitiesin
Chinaandaroundtheworld.
carbon
ThePolicyAddressadvisedthat
environmentalprotectionwillbefurther
strengthenedthroughclosecollaborations
with neighbours in the Pearl River Delta in
theareasofpost-2010emissionreduction
arrangements,theoptimisationofthefuelmix
forpowergeneration,andthedevelopment
andwideruseofrenewableenergy.Inthis
regard, Government, commercial firms and
individualsallhavearoletoplayinachieving
sustainability.
TheChiefExecutivealsoendorsedthe
needtoaddressclimatechangebybuilding
alowcarboneconomybasedonenergy
conservation,theusageofcleanfuelsanda
reductionintheuseofcoal.
Some80%ofHongKong’stotalEcological
Footprintin2005wasthecarboncomponent.
Thisisexpressedasanestimateoftheareaof
worldforestthatwouldberequiredtoremove
andretainthecarbondioxideemissionsfrom
fossil fuel combustion. Reducing carbon
emissionsisthereforeessentialtoreducing
HongKong’soverallecologicalovershoot.
carbon reduction strategies:
governmental.HongKong’spercapita
EcologicalFootprinthasgrownrapidly
since 1965, and has since continued to rise
duetothedramaticincrementinitscarbon
component. Over 60% of carbon dioxide
isemittedbytheburningoffossilfuelsfor
electricitygeneration.HongKong’selectricity
is mostly generated by coal-fired power
stations.Intermsofcarbondioxideemissions,
coalisdoublethatofnaturalgas.
in the Policy Address, The HKSAR Chief
Executivecommittedtoexploringwaysto
graduallyincreasetheuseofcleanenergy
sources,forexample,naturalgasforpower
generationfromthecurrent28percentto50
percent. However, without a specific timetable
forimplementation,itremainstobeseenhow
effectivesuchbroadpolicydirectiveswillbein
contributingtoalowcarboneconomy.
Hong Kong would certainly benefit from
theintroductionofstringentgovernment
Renewable Obligations (RO) to the electricity
utilities. Such a RO would place an obligation
onHongKongsuppliersofelectricityto
increasetheproportionofrenewableenergy
intheircurrentgenerationportfoliowithin
a specific timeframe. Voluntary initiatives
areunlikelytoresultincity-widereductions
fastenoughtomeaningfullysupportglobal
commitmentsofemissionsreductions.
commercial.Commerceisthehighest
consumerofenergyinHongKong,abovethe
transport,industrialandresidentialsectors.
Itaccountsfor37percentoftotalenergyuse
(Figure 17). Office buildings consume much of
theenergyinthecommercialsector.Some48
percent of the energy consumption in an office
buildingistypicallyforspaceconditioning,
22 percent for office equipment, 19 percent
forlighting,and11percentforliftsandthe
others.Buildingownersandconstruction
companiescanincreaseimplementationand
adoptionofeffectivelow-carbondesigns
andmanagementsystemsforbuildings
and offices. Carbon audits for buildings can
provideguidanceandtoolsforbothowners
andtenantstoreduceemissions.
individual. Theindividualcontributionmade
byHongKongresidentstowardsasustainable
societycanbesubstantial.Individualscan
measurethecarbonemissionsproduced
bytheirownpersonalconsumptionusing
WWF’scarboncalculator(www.climateers.
org).Actionscanbetakentochangedaily
habitsathomeandatwork,whichwillbring
a significant reduction in personal carbon
footprint.
live reeF FooD FisH
HongKong’sdemandforseafoodhaslong
exceededtheamountitslimitedterritorial
waterscanproduce.Indeed,thedemandfrom
HongKongandmainlandChinaforcertain
species of reef fish that can be chosen live just
beforebeingcookedhasledtoHongKong
becomingnotonlyanimportingconsumer,
but also the centre for significant global trade,
primarilyforre-exportstomainlandChina.
This huge demand for live Reef Food Fish
(lRFF) has driven the rapid expansion of
this fishery in Asia (Figure 18). in the 1970s,
Figure 17: Hong Kong energy consumpTion by secTors, 1995-2005
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Year
0
50 000
100 000
150 000
200 000
250 000
300 000
Tera
jou
le
CommercialTransport ResidentialIndustrial
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 ��
TU
Rn
inG
TH
E T
iDE
the fishery for lRFF was mainly in the South
ChinaSeaborderingthePhilippines,Spratley,
ParacelandPratasIslands.Whentheseareas
became depleted, in the 1980s, the lRFF
fishery expanded to waters off Malaysia,
Singapore, Palau and indonesia; by the 1990s
the areas fished had quadrupled in response
totheunsustainabledemand.HongKongand
increasinglysouthernmainlandChinanow
take a significant portion of the total stock
of live fish, particularly high-value groupers
and wrasses, from the Pacific and the indian
Oceans.
The number of countries involved in the lRFF
tradeescalatedfrom18in1998to35in2005,
whiletheimportsofthreeimportantwild-
caught lRFF species increased by almost
60 percent from 1999 to 2006. Since 1999
(when species-level trade data first became
available),leopardcoraltrouthasbeenthe
mostheavily-tradedspecies,followedby
squaretailcoraltroutandhumpheadwrasse.
Therecordquantityforimportofthesethree
speciesintoHongKongreachedalmost3,400
tonnes in 2006. Humphead wrasse is now
listedinAppendixIIofCITES(Convention
ontheInternationalTradeofEndangered
SpeciesofFloraandFauna),whilethecurrent
conservationstatusofsquaretailcoraltrout
is ‘Vulnerable’ on the iUCn Red list 2008. All
threespecies(exceptleopardcoraltroutfrom
Australia)areintheWWFHongKongSeafood
Guide“Avoid”category.
lrFF reduction strategies:
sustainable fishery management.
Catchesfromlocalwatersarepoor,and
composedmostlyofsmallandlowvalue
species, as a result of unsustainable fishing
practices.Initiativestodesignandimplement
sustainable fisheries management and
restore fish stocks have begun, and if fully
implementedwillresultinincreasedcatches
oflargerspeciesofhighvalue,andpotentially
an increase of 7 percent in self-sufficiency in
25years.
individuals and businesses.Local,
unsustainablyharvestedseafoodcanbe
substituted for that which is sustainable;
WWF’sSeafoodGuideisahandyreference.
Productswhichareinherentlyunsustainable
today, such as shark fin, should simply be
avoided.SeafoodproductswithaMarine
StewardshipCouncil(MSC)labelhavebeen
sustainablyharvested.
susTainable Finance anD
consumpTion
ThepublicsectorinHongKongisamajor
enduserofimportednaturalresources,
andcanguidethecommercialsector.At
presentsustainabilitytargetsareusedonly
sporadicallyinprocurementpolicies,andare
neitherinitiatednordevelopedinastrategic
manner.Introducingtargetsandpoliciestop
Figure 18: source counTries For live reeF FooD FisH imporTeD inTo Hong Kong, cHina
INDIAN OCEAN
SOUTH PACIFIC OCEAN
NORTH PACIFIC OCEAN
Arabian Sea Bay of Bengal
East China Sea
SouthChina Sea
Celebes Sea
China
Thailand
TaiwanHong Kong
Philippines
MalaysiaSingapore
IndonesiaPapua New Guinea
Marshall Islands
Solomon Islands
Australia
Japan
Sri Lanka
India X
Adapted from While Stocks Last – The Live Reef Food Fish Trade, Asian Development Bank
1970s
1980s
1990s
downacrossallbureausandgovernment
departmentswouldhelpreduceHongKong’s
Footprint.Forexample,arequirementcan
besetthatpaperandtimberproductscome
fromrecycledorlegal,sustainablyharvested
sources(e.g.ForestStewardshipCouncil
certified), with industry and individuals
encouragedtodothesame.
Companies are increasingly finding new and
innovativewaystoshifttowardssustainable
practices. As a financial hub where many
multi-national companies locate offices
andoperations,HongKongcanleadinthe
adoptionofsustainablebusinesspractices,
encouragingothercitiestodothesame.
Through its financial investment mechanisms,
HongKongplaysagloballyimportantrole
inthesourcingandutilizationofnatural
resources.InstitutionsbasedinHongKong
still finance some dubious practices, directly
andindirectly,despitethisultimatelybeingbad
forbusiness,andpotentiallydamagingtotheir
reputation.Whilemoreprogressiveleaders
haveestablishedsustainabilitypolicies,others
candomore.Stockexchangeregulationscan
bechangedtoeliminateHongKong’sdirector
indirect financing of unsustainable practices
suchasillegallogginganddeforestation
operations.
�� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
FREQUEnTlY ASKED QUESTiOnS
HowistheEcologicalFootprint
calculated?
TheEcologicalFootprintmeasuresthe
amountofbiologicallyproductivelandand
waterarearequiredtoproducetheresources
anindividual,populationoractivityconsumes.
Itsimultaneouslymeasuresthearea
requiredtoabsorbthewastewegenerate,
givenprevailingtechnologyandresource
management.Thisareaisexpressedin
globalhectares,whichhaveworld-average
biologicalproductivity.Footprintcalculations
useyieldfactorstotakeintoaccountnational
differencesinbiologicalproductivity(e.g.,
tonnes of wheat per UK hectare versus per
Argentinahectare)andequivalencefactors
totakeintoaccountdifferencesinworld
averageproductivityamonglandtypes(e.g.,
worldaverageforestversusworldaverage
cropland).
Footprintandbiocapacityresultsfornations
arecalculatedannuallybytheGlobalFootprint
Network.Thecontinuingmethodological
developmentoftheseNationalFootprint
Accountsisoverseenbyareviewcommittee
(www.Footprintstandards.org/committees).
Adetailedmethodspaperandcopiesof
samplecalculationsheetscanbeobtainedat
www.footprintnetwork.org.
WhatdoesapercapitanationalFootprint
actuallymean?
ApercapitanationalFootprintmeasuresthe
amountofbioproductivespaceunderconstant
productionrequiredtosupporttheaverage
individualofthatcountry.Forexample,a
five-hectare per person Footprint means that
anaverageindividualinthatcountryusesall
of the resources provided by five hectares
ofworld-averageproductiveland.Thisland
doesnotneedtobewithinthebordersof
theindividual’scountryasbiocapacityis
oftenimportedfromothercountriestomeet
consumptiondemands.
WhatisincludedintheEcological
Footprint?Whatisexcluded?
Toavoidexaggeratinghumandemandon
nature,theEcologicalFootprintincludes
onlythoseaspectsofresourceconsumption
andwasteproductionforwhichtheEarth
hasregenerativecapacity,andwheredata
existthatallowthisdemandtobeexpressed
intermsofproductivearea.Forexample,
freshwaterwithdrawalisnotincludedinthe
Footprint,althoughtheenergyusedtopump
ortreatitis.
EcologicalFootprintaccountsprovide
snapshotsofpastresourcedemandand
availability.Theydonotpredictthefuture.
Thus,whiletheFootprintdoesnotestimate
futurelossescausedbypresentdegradation
ofecosystems,ifpersistentthisdegradation
will likely be reflected in future accounts as a
lossofbiocapacity.
Footprintaccountsalsodonotindicatethe
intensitywithwhichabiologicallyproductive
areaisbeingused,nordotheypinpoint
specific biodiversity pressures. Finally, the
Ecological Footprint is a biophysical measure;
itdoesnotevaluatetheessentialsocialand
economicdimensionsofsustainability.
Howdoyoumeasurebiocapacityandhow
doyoudeterminehowmuchisavailable?
Biocapacityperpersoniscalculatedby
takingthetotalamountofbioproductiveland
worldwideanddividingitbyworldpopulation.
Itisagloballyaggregatedmeasureofthe
amountoflandandseaareaavailableper
persontoproducecrops,livestock(pasture),
timber products (forest) and fish (fishery
grounds),tosupportinfrastructure(built-up-
land)andtosequestercarbonemission.A
nation’sbiocapacitymayincludemoreglobal
hectaresthanthenationhasactualhectares
ifitslandandseaareaarehighlyproductive.
Biocapacity assessments reflect technological
advancementsthatincreaseyields,asthe
conversionofhectaresintoglobalhectares
takesintoaccountproductivity.
HowdoestheEcologicalFootprint
account for the use of fossil fuels?
Fossilfuelssuchascoal,oil,andnaturalgas
areextractedfromtheEarth’scrustrather
thanproducedbycurrentecosystems.When
burningthisfuel,carbondioxideisproduced.
Inordertoavoidcarbondioxideaccumulation
in the atmosphere, the goal of the Un
FrameworkConventiononClimateChange,
twooptionsexist:a)humantechnological
sequestration, such as deep well injection; or
b)naturalsequestration.Naturalsequestration
correspondstothebiocapacityrequiredto
absorbandstorethecarbondioxidenot
sequesteredbyhumans,lesstheamount
absorbedbytheoceans.ThisistheFootprint
forfossilfuels.Currently,negligibleamounts
ofcarbondioxidearesequesteredthrough
humantechnologicalprocesses.
ThesequestrationrateusedinEcological
Footprintcalculationsisbasedonanestimate
ofhowmuchcarbontheworld’sforestscan
removefromtheatmosphereandretain.One
2005globalhectarecanabsorbthecarbon
dioxidereleasedbyburningapproximately
1525litresofgasolineperyear.
ThefossilfuelFootprintdoesnotsuggestthat
carbonsequestrationisthekeytoresolving
global warming. Rather the opposite: it shows
that the biosphere does not have sufficient
capacitytocopewithcurrentlevelsofcarbon
dioxideemissions.Asforestsmature,their
carbondioxidesequestrationrateapproaches
zero,andtheFootprintpertonneofcarbon
dioxidesequestrationincreases.Eventually,
forestsmayevenbecomenetemittersof
carbon.
Howisinternationaltradetaken
intoaccount?
ThenationalEcologicalFootprintaccounts
calculateeachcountry’snetconsumption
byaddingitsimportstoitsproductionand
subtractingitsexports.Thismeansthatthe
resourcesusedforproducingacarthatis
manufacturedinJapan,butsoldandused
inIndia,willcontributetotheIndian,notthe
JapaneseconsumptionFootprint.
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 ��
DA
TA
TheresultingnationalconsumptionFootprints
canbedistorted,sincetheresourcesused
andwastegeneratedinmakingproductsfor
exportarenotfullydocumented.Thiscanbias
the Footprints of countries whose trade-flows
arelargerelativetotheiroveralleconomies.
Thesemisallocations,however,donotaffect
thetotalglobalEcologicalFootprint.
Does the ecological Footprint matter if
the supply of renewable resources can
beincreasedandadvancesintechnology
can slow the depletion of non-renewable
resources?
TheEcologicalFootprintmeasuresthecurrent
stateofresourceuseandwastegeneration.It
asks:Inagivenyear,didhumandemandon
ecosystemsexceedtheabilityofecosystems
tomeetthisdemand?Footprintanalysis
reflects both increases in the productivity
ofrenewableresources(forexample,ifthe
productivityofcroplandisincreased,thenthe
Footprintof1tonneofwheatwilldecrease)
andtechnologicalinnovation(forexample,
ifthepaperindustrydoublestheoverall
efficiency of paper production, the Footprint
pertonneofpaperwillbecutbyhalf).
EcologicalFootprintaccountscapturethese
changesastheyoccurandcandetermine
theextenttowhichtheseinnovationshave
succeededinbringinghumandemandwithin
thecapacityoftheplanet’secosystems.If
there is a sufficient increase in ecological
supplyandareductioninhumandemanddue
totechnologicaladvancesorotherfactors,
Footprintaccountswillshowthisasthe
eliminationofglobalovershoot.
DoestheEcologicalFootprintignorethe
role of population growth as a driver in
humanity’s increasing consumption?
ThetotalEcologicalFootprintofanationor
ofhumanityasawholeisafunctionofthe
numberofpeopleconsuming,thequantity
ofgoodsandservicesanaverageperson
consumes,andtheresourceintensityof
thesegoodsandservices.SinceFootprint
accountingishistorical,itdoesnotpredict
howanyofthesefactorswillchangein
thefuture.However,ifpopulationgrowsor
declines(oranyoftheotherfactorschange),
this will be reflected in future Footprint
accounts.
Footprintaccountsalsoshowhowresource
consumptionisdistributedamongregions.For
example, the total Footprint of the Asia-Pacific
region,withitslargepopulationbutlowper
personFootprint,canbedirectlycomparedto
thatofNorthAmerica,withitsmuchsmaller
populationbutmuchlargerperperson
Footprint.
How have the 2008 national accounts
been adapted for Hong Kong?
Duetoalackofavailabledata,several
alterationstothestandardNationalFootprint
Accountsmethodologywerenecessary
tocalculateHongKong’sFootprintand
biocapacityovertime.Theseadaptations
involvedusingalternatedatasourcesto
calculateFootprintcomponents.Insome
cases,onlyasingleyear’sdatawasavailable,
requiringtimeseriesdatatobeestimated
basedonpopulation.
cropland
TheFAOSTATstatisticaldatabasedoes
notcontainagriculturalharvestortrade
dataforHongKongseparatelyfromChina.
ThecroplandFootprintofproductionfor
HongKongwasestimatedfor2005based
onproductiondataforafewbroadcrop
categories,thenextrapolatedtoprevious
yearsusingaconstantpercapitaFootprint
ofproduction.Tradeincropproductswas
estimated based on data from the Un
COMTRADE database.
grazing land
Likecropland,thegrazinglandFootprint
ofproductionwasestimatedfor2005,and
assumedtobeproportionaltopopulation
inpreviousyears.Tradeinlivestockwas
also estimated based on data from the Un
COMTRADE database.
Forest land
TheforestlandFootprintofproductionwas
assumedtobezero.TheembodiedFootprints
oftradedforestproductswasestimatedbased
on the Un COMTRADE database, since Hong
KongisnotincludedintheFAOForesSTAT
database.
FishingGrounds
Traded quantities of fish commodities were
derived from the Un COMTRADE database.
built-up land
LandcoverareasusedforFootprintand
biocapacitycalculationswerefromthe
planningdepartmentofthegovernmentof
the Hong Kong SAR. They were taken from
http://www.pland.gov.hk/info_serv/statistic/
landu_e.html(Accessed30August2008).
Thissourceonlyprovideslandcoverdatafor
theyears2003-2007,so2005numberswere
usedandwereassumedtobeconstantin
previousyears.
Why has Hong Kong’s ecological Footprint
declined since the late 1990s?
Anumberoffactorsmayhaveplayedarole.
Twohistoricaleventsoccurredin1997:the
Asianmarketcrisis,andHongKong’sreturn
toChinesesovereignty.Analysisofhowthese
twoeventsimpactedHongKong’strade
flows and consumption patterns would show
theextenttowhichtheycontributedtothe
Footprintdecline.However,thisgoesbeyond
thescopeofthecurrentreport.
MoreinformationaboutEcologicalFootprint
methodology,datasources,assumptions
and definitions can be found in The
EcologicalFootprintAtlas2008,availableat:
www.footprintnetwork.org/atlas
�� HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
TECHNICALNOTES
ecological FooTprinT accounTing
TheEcologicalFootprintisawellknown
resourceaccountingtoolthatmeasureshow
muchbiologicallyproductivelandandwater
areaanindividual,acity,acountry,aregion,
orhumanityusestoproducetheresources
itconsumesandtoabsorbthewastesit
generates,usingprevailingtechnologyand
resourcemanagement.TheEcological
Footprintismostcommonlyexpressedinunits
ofglobalhectares.
Aglobalhectareisahectarethatisnormalized
tohavetheworldaverageproductivityofall
biologicallyproductivelandandwaterina
givenyear.Becauseofinternationaltradeand
thedispersionofwastes,hectaresdemanded
canbephysicallylocatedanywhereinthe
world.
HongKong’sEcologicalFootprintmeasures
thebiologicalcapacityneededtoproducethe
goodsandservicesconsumedbyresidentsof
HongKong,aswellasthecapacityneededto
assimilatethecarbonemissionstheygenerate.
Resources used for the production of goods
andservicesthatareexportedarecounted
intheEcologicalFootprintoftheregion
wherethegoodsandservicesareultimately
consumed.
Biocapacity(orbiologicalcapacity)is
thecapacityofecosystemstoproduce
usefulbiologicalmaterialsandtoabsorb
wastegeneratedbyhumansusingcurrent
managementschemesandextraction
technologies. “Useful biological materials”
are defined by the human economy that year.
Whatisconsidered“useful”canchangeover
time(e.g.theuseofcornstovertoproduce
cellulosicethanolwouldresultincornstover
becomingausefulmaterial,therebyincreasing
thebiocapacityformaizecropland).
An ecological deficit represents the amount
bywhichtheEcologicalFootprintofa
populationexceedstheavailablebiocapacity
ofthatpopulation’sterritoryinagivenyear.
A national ecological deficit measures the
amountbywhichacountry’sFootprint
exceedsitsbiocapacity.Anationcanoperate
its economy with an ecological deficit by
importingbiocapacityfromothernations,by
placingdemandsontheglobalcommons(e.g.
carbon stocks in the atmosphere, fishing in the
internationalwaters),orbydepletingitsown
domesticecologicalassets.Aglobalecological
deficit, however, cannot be offset through
tradeandinevitablyleadstothedepletionof
ecologicalassetsand/ortheaccumulationof
wastes.
PopulationswithanEcologicalFootprint
smallerthantheiravailablebiocapacity
areoperatingwithanecologicalreserve,
meaningthateachyearthelandgenerates
morebioproductivitythanisconsumedby
thecitizens.Anation’secologicalreserveis
notnecessarilyunused,howeverbutmaybe
occupiedbytheFootprintsofothercountries
thatimportbiocapacityfromthatnation.
Countriesalsomaychoosetoreservethis
biocapacityfortheuseofwildspeciesorfor
futuregenerations.
DaTa sources
TheEcologicalFootprintresultsforHong
Kongandothernationsfoundinthisreport
arebasedonGlobalFootprintNetwork’s
NationalFootprintAccounts,2008Edition.
TheseaccountscalculatetheEcological
Footprintandbiocapacityof150nationswith
populations over one million from 1961-2005.
Results are available by request from Global
FootprintNetwork(data@footprintnetwork.
org).
NationalFootprintAccountscalculations
arebasedprimarilyoninternationaldata
setspublishedbytheFoodandAgriculture
Organization of the United nations (FAO),
theInternationalEnergyAgency(IEA),the
Un Statistics Division (Un Commodity Trade
Statistics Database – Un Comtrade), and the
IntergovernmentalPanelonClimateChange
(IPCC).Otherdatasourcesincludestudiesin
peer-reviewedsciencejournalsandthematic
collections.BecausetheFAOdoesnottrack
dataseparatelyfromChina,theanalysisof
Hong Kong’s Footprint required modification of
thestandardFootprintmethod(asdetailedin
theFrequentlyAskedQuestionssection).
meTHoDology
EcologicalFootprintaccountingisbasedonsix
fundamentalassumptions:
• Themajorityofresourcespeopleconsume
andthewastestheygeneratecanbe
tracked.
• Most of these resources and waste flows
canbemeasuredintermsofthebiologically
productiveareanecessarytomaintain
flows. Resource and waste flows that
cannotbemeasuredareexcludedfrom
theassessment,leadingtoasystematic
underestimateofhumanity’strueEcological
Footprint.
• Byweighingeachareainproportiontoits
bioproductivity,differenttypesofareascan
beconvertedintothecommonunitofglobal
hectares,hectareswithworldaverage
bioproductivity.
• Becauseasingleglobalhectarerepresents
asinglemutuallyexclusiveuse,andall
globalhectaresinanysingleyearrepresent
thesameamountofbioproductivity,they
canbeaddeduptoobtainanaggregate
indicatorofEcologicalFootprintor
biocapacity.
• Humandemand,expressedasthe
EcologicalFootprint,canbedirectly
comparedtonature’ssupply,biocapacity,
whenbothareexpressedinglobal
hectares.
• Areademandedcanexceedareasupplied
ifdemandonanecosystemexceedsthat
ecosystemsregenerativeregenerative
capacity(e.g.,humanscantemporarily
demand resources from forests or fisheries
fasterthantheyarebeingreplaced).This
situation,whereEcologicalFootprint
exceedsavailablebiocapacity,isknownas
overshoot.
updates to the methodology since 2006
The most extensive change from the 2006
editionoftheNationalFootprintAccountsto
the2008editionwasinresponsetoarevision
in the structure of the United nations Food
andAgricultureOrganization’sCorporate
StatisticalDatabase(FAOFAOSTATStatistical
Databases2007).Thisdatabase,which
servesasthebasisforthenationalFootprint
calculations,formerlyaggregatedallproducts
into10groups.FAOnolongerprovidesthese
aggregatedproductgroups,sointhe2008
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 19
DA
TA
editionoftheNFAraw,non-aggregated
datawasusedinstead.Thissubstantially
increasedthenumberofcommoditiesfor
whichproductionandtradedataareavailable,
leadingtomoredetailedaccountsbutalso
requiringtheuseofadditionalconversion
factorstodeterminetheprimaryproduct
equivalentsofprocessedproducts.These
newconversionfactorswerecompiledfroma
variety of FAO and other Un sources.
Other specific changes to the 2008 accounts
includetrackinganincreasednumberof
commoditiesforcropland,estimatingoverall
demandongrazinglandbysubtracting
marketfeedandresiduesfromanimalfeed
requirements,andexpansionofthelistof
fish species caught for the fishing ground
Footprint.Additionalsourcesofcarbondioxide
emissionsareaccountedforinthe2008
accounts, including emissions from gas flaring,
cement production, tropical forest fires, and
some biofuels. Another significant change in
the2008Editionwaseliminationofaproxy
thatestimatedthenuclerpowerintermsofthe
carbondioxidethatwouldhavebeenemitted
ifanequivalentamountofelectricitywere
generatedusingfossilfuels.
Thesemethodologicalchangeshaveresulted
inasmallincreaseinbothpercapitaFootprint
andbiocapacityforChinawhenresultsofthe
twoeditionsarecompared,foragivenyear
(Table4).However,theratiobetweenFootprint
andbiocapacityremainedlargelyunchanged.
limiTaTions
AlthoughthegoalofEcologicalFootprint
accountingistomeasurehumandemandon
thebiosphereasaccuratelyaspossible,no
singleindicatorcancaptureeveryaspectof
therelationshipbetweenhumanactivitiesand
naturalecosystems.ThecurrentEcological
Footprintmethodologyhasseverallimitations
thatsuggestareaswhereadditionalindicators
maybeusedformorecompletedecision
making.
BecausetheFootprintisanhistorical
accountingtool,manyactivitiesthat
systematicallyerodenature’sfuture
regenerativecapacityarenotincluded
incurrentandpastEcologicalFootprint
accounts.Theseactivitiesincludetherelease
ofmaterialsforwhichthebiospherehas
no significant assimilation capacity (e.g.
plutonium,PCBs,dioxins,andotherpersistent
pollutants)andprocessesthatdamagethe
biosphere’sfuturecapacity(e.g.,lossof
biodiversity,salinationresultingfromcropland
irrigation,soilerosionfromtilling).Although
theconsequencesoftheseactivitieswill
be reflected in future Ecological Footprint
accountsasadecreaseinbiocapacity,
EcologicalFootprintaccountingdoesnot
currentlyincluderiskassessmentmodelsthat
couldallowapresentaccountingofthese
futuredamages.
Similarly,EcologicalFootprintaccountsdo
notdirectlyaccountforfreshwateruseand
availability,sincefreshwatercanactasalimit
ontheamountofbiologicalcapacityinan
areabutisnotitselfabiologicallyproduced
resource.Althoughthelossofbiocapacity
associatedwithwaterappropriationor
water quality degradation is reflected as a
decreaseinoverallbiocapacityinthatyear,an
Ecological Footprint reflecting this use is not
currentlyallocatedtowaterconsumers.
Tourismactivitiesarecurrentlyattributedto
thecountryinwhichtheyoccurratherthanto
thetraveler’scountryoforigin.Thisdistorts
therelativesizeofsomecountries’Footprints,
overestimatingthosethathosttouristsand
underestimatingthehomecountriesof
travelers.Currentdataconstraintsalsoprevent
theFootprintassociatedwiththegeneration
ofinternationally-tradedelectricityfrombeing
allocated to the final consumer of this energy.
incomplete scientific knowledge about the fate
ofgreenhousegasesotherthancarbondioxide
makes it difficult to estimate the biocapacity
requiredtoneutralizetheirclimatechange
potential.Thedemandonbiocapacityfrom
emissionoftheseothergreenhousegasesis
thereforenotcurrentlyincludedinEcological
Footprintaccounts.Carbondioxideadded
to the atmosphere from flaring of gas and oil
wells,chemicalprocessincementproduction,
tropical rain forest fires and some biofuesls is
includedinthetotalglobalFootprint,butnot
allocatedtoindividualcountries.
cHina (2003)
2006 national accounts 2008 national accounts
EcologicalFootprint(gha per person)
biocapacity (gha per person)
EcologicalFootprint(gha per person)
biocapacity (gha per person)
Cropland 0.40 0.34 0.53 0.39
GrazingLand 0.12 0.12 0.15 0.15
ForestLand 0.12 0.16 0.13 0.16
FishingGrounds 0.17 0.09 0.06 0.08
Carbon Uptake land 0.75 — 0.92 —
Built-upLand 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08
Total 1.64 0.78 1.87 0.86
Table 4: cHina’s FooTprinT anD biocapaciTy in 2003: comparison oF resulTs From THe 2006 versus 2008 eDiTion oF THe naTional FooTprinT accounTs
20 HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008
general
1. Ewing B., S. Goldfinger, M. Wackernagel,
M. Stechbart, S.M. Rizk, A. Reed, J.
Kitzes.2008TheEcologicalFootprint
Atlas2008.Oakland:GlobalFootprint
Network.
2. Ewing B., A. Reed, S. M. Rizk, A Galli,
M.WackernagelandJ.Kitzes,2008.
CalculationMethodologyfortheNational
FootprintAccounts,2008Edition.
Oakland:GlobalFootprintNetwork.
3. Fogary, D. “nations see REDD in rush
for carbon credits.” Reuters, 29 October
2008,viaAlertNet,http://www.alertnet.
org/thenews/newsdesk/SP293751.htm
(accessed29October2008).
4. Galli,A.,J.Kitzes,P.Wermer,M.
Wackernagel, V. niccolucci, and E.
Tiezzi.2007.AnExplorationofthe
MathematicsBehindtheEcological
Footprint.InternationalJournalof
Ecodynamics2(4):250-257.
5. GlobalFootprintNetwork.2008.National
FootprintAccounts,2008Edition.
Availableatwww.footprintnetwork.org.
6. The Government of the Hong Kong
Special Administrative Region, “Broad
land Useage Distribution,” Planning
Department,2008.http://www.pland.
gov.hk/info_serv/statistic/landu_e.html
(accessedAugust2008).
REFEREnCES
7. Kitzes,J.,S.Buchan,A.Galli,B.Ewing,
C.Shengkui,X.Gaodi,C.Shuyan.2008.
Report on Ecological Footprint in China.
CCiCED, WWF, inGSnRR, Global
FootprintNetwork.
8. Kitzes, J., A. Peller, S. Goldfinger, and M.
Wackernagel.2007.CurrentMethodsfor
CalculatingNationalEcologicalFootprint
Accounts.ScienceforEnvironment&
SustainableSociety4(1):1-9.
9. Monfreda,C,M.Wackernagel,andD.
Deumling.2004.Establishingnational
naturalcapitalaccountsbasedon
detailedEcologicalFootprintand
biologicalcapacityassessments.Land
Use Policy 21: 231-246.
10. United States Department of State,
“BackgroundNote:HongKong,”Bureau
of East Asian and Pacific Affairs, 2008,
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2747.htm
(accessedSeptember20,2008)
11. Wackernagel,M.,C.Monfreda,D.
Moran, P. Wermer, S., Goldfinger, D.
DeumlingandM.Murray.2005.National
FootprintandBiocapacityAccounts2005:
The Underlying Calculation Method.
Availableatwww.footprintnetwork.org.
Additionalreferencescanbefoundat
www.footprintnetwork.org/datamethods.
12. WorldBankStatisticalDatabase.
http://go.worldbank.org/45B5H20nV0
(accessedJanuary2007).
Hong Kong : TransFormaTion To
susTainabiliTy secTion
1. Report on Ecological Footprint in China
2008.http://www.wwfchina.org/english/
downloads/China%20Footprint/chna_
footprint_report_final.pdf
2. Sadovy, YJ., TJ. Donaldson, TR. Graham,
F.McGilvray,GJ.Muldoon,MJ.Phillips,
MA. Rimmer, A. Smith and B. Yeeting.
While Stocks last – The live Reef Food
FishTrade,AsianDevelopmentBank
(2003):147pp
3. TheCensusandStatisticsDepartment
andtheAgriculture,Fisheriesand
Conservation Department of the HKSAR
Government 1999-2006. Data collected
andcollated.http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/
andhttp://www.afcd.gov.hk/
4. EnvironmentalProtectionDepartmentof
HKSAR, “HK Greenhouse Gas inventory”
March2008http://www.epd.gov.
hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/data/
emission_inve_ghg.html
5. Census and Statistics Department figures
“ElectricityConsumption”October2008,
http://www.censtatd.gov.hk/hong_kong_
statistics/statistical_tables/index.jsp
6. Electrical and Mechanical Services
Department of the HKSAR Government.
“HongKongEnergyEnd-useData”2007
(Note:ElectricityfromDayaBayNuclear
PowerStationinGuangdongProvince
isnotincludedinthisreportascurrent
EcologicalFootprintmethodologydoes
notaccountforelectricityfromnuclear
powerplants.http://www.emsd.gov.
hk/emsd/e_download/pee/HKEEUD2007.
pdf)
7. EnvironmentBureau,“EnergySupplies”
April2008,http://www.enb.gov.hk/en/
about_us/policy_responsibilities/energy.
html
8. HongKongChiefExecutives2008-2009
PolicyAddress:http://www.policyaddress.
gov.hk/08-09/index.html
9. InternationalEnergyAgency,World
Energy Outlook, 2006
http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/
10. Lin,SY.1940.TheFishingIndustriesof
HongKong.JournaloftheHongKong
Fisheries Research Station, 1(1) 5-101.
11. Dudgeon, D., and R. Corlett. 2004. The
EcologyandBiodiversityofHongKong,
JointPublishing(HK)CompanyLtd.,
336pp
12. lau, PPF. and R. Parry-Jones. 1999.
The Hong Kong Trade in live Reef Fish
For Food. TRAFFiC East Asia and World
WideFundForNatureHongKong,Hong
Kong, 65pp
HOnG KOnG ECOlOGiCAl FOOTPRinT REPORT 2008 ��
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
special THanKs To:
AlanLeung
GuillermoMoreno
Prof.YvonneSadovy
WWF China Office
GlobalFootprintNetwork
GlobalFootprintNetworkwouldespeciallylike
tothankthesponsor,authorsandcontributors
to the CCiCED-WWF (2008) Report on
Ecological Footprint in China. Some findings
fromtheChinareportwereincorporatedinto
thisreport,andtheanalysisandinsights
offeredintheChinareportbothinspiredthe
authors of the Hong Kong report and simplified
ourtask.
PHOTOS
Adam Minu, Clarus Chu, Rubin Chua, Martin Harvey, leung Wai Ki, Vicma lee, Rex ng, SamsonSo,WWFHongKong
Muchoftheresearchforthisreportwould
nothavebeenpossiblewithoutthegenerous
supportof:SkollFoundation,Pollux-
Privatstiftung,FundaçãoCalousteGulbenkian,
OakFoundation,TheLewisFoundation,
Erlenmeyer-Stiftung, Roy A. Hunt Foundation,
TheWinslowFoundation,FloraFamily
Foundation, TAUPO Fund, Mental insight
Foundation, Richard and Rhoda Goldman
Fund,TheDudleyFoundation,Foundation
Harafi, The Swiss Agency for Development
andCooperation,WWFinternational,and
CooleyGodwardLLP.
WewouldalsoliketoacknowledgeGlobal
FootprintNetwork’s100partnerorganizations
andtheGlobalFootprintNetworkNational
AccountsCommitteefortheirguidance,
contributionsandcommitmenttorobust
NationalFootprintAccounts.
PublishedinNovember2008byWWFHongKong.
Anyreproductioninfullorinpartofthispublicationmustmentionthetitleandcredittheabove-mentionedpublisherasthecopyrightowner.
©TextandGraphics:2008WWF.Allrightsreserved.
Thematerialandthegeographicaldesignations
inthisreportdonotimplytheexpressionof
anyopinionwhatsoeveronthepartofWWF
concerningthelegalstatusofanycountry,
territory,orarea,orconcerningthedelimitationof
itsfrontiersorboundaries.
WWF’smissionistostopthedegradationoftheplanet’snaturalenvironmentandtobuildafutureinwhichhumansliveinharmonywithnature,by:
• Conservingtheworld’sbiologicaldiversity
• Ensuringthattheuseofrenewablenaturalresourcesissustainable
• Promotingthereductionofpollutionandwastefulconsumption
WWFHongKong
Suite1002,AsianHouse,1 Hennessy Road, Wanchai,HongKong
wwf.org.hk
Tel: (852) 2526 1011 Fax:(852)28452734Email:[email protected]
This report is printed on FSC certified paper, containing recycled materials and using vegetable oil-based inks.
30%
25%
