Generalizing ecological, water and carbon footprint methods and their worldview assumptions using Embedded Resource Accounting

Water Resources and Industry

Volumn 1-2, Issue , 2013, Pages 77-90

  Rushforth, Richard R ^a   Adams, Elizabeth A ^a   Ruddell, Benjamin L ^a,b  

^a Arizona State University   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Carbon; Ecological; Embedded Resource Accounting; Footprint; Virtual water; Water

Indexed keywords

EID: 84882791719     PISSN: 22123717     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.wri.2013.05.001     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Liu J., Dietz T., Carpenter S.R., et al. Coupled human and natural systems. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 2007, 36:639-649.
2. Geiger D., Heckerman D. Knowledge representation and inference in similarity networks and Bayesian multinets. Artificial Intelligence 1996, 82:45-74.
3. J. Bilmes, Dynamic Bayesian Multinets, in: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, 2000, pp. 38-45.
4. Taylor P.J. Leading world cities: empirical evaluations of urban nodes in multiple networks. Urban Studies 2005, 42:1593-1608.
5. Y. Matsuo, M. Hamasaki, Y. Nakamura et al., Spinning multiple social networks for semantic web, p. 1381.
6. Liu J., Dietz T., Carpenter S.R., et al. Complexity of coupled human and natural systems. Science 2007, 317:1513-1516.
7. Kates R.W., Clark W.C., Corell R., et al. Sustainability science. Science 2001, 292:641-642.
8. Chapagain A.K., Hoekstra A.Y., Savenije H.H.G., et al. The water footprint of cotton consumption: an assessment of the impact of worldwide consumption of cotton products on the water resources in the cotton producing countries. Ecological Economics 2006, 60:186-203.
9. Herendeen R.A. Energy analysis and EMERGY analysis-a comparison. Ecological Modelling 2004, 178:227-237.
10. Luck M.A., Jenerette G.D., Wu J., et al. The urban funnel model and the spatially heterogeneous ecological footprint. Ecosystems 2001, 4:782-796.
11. Kennedy C., Cuddihy J., Engel-Yan J. The changing metabolism of cities. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2008, 11:43-59.
12. van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Verbruggen H. Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'. Ecological Economics 1999, 29:61-72.
13. T. Allan, The Middle East water question: hydropolitics and the global economy, Ib Tauris, 2002.
14. Ruddell B.L., Kumar P. Ecohydrologic process networks: 1. Identification. Water Resources Research 2009, 45:W03419.
15. Klöpffer W. Life cycle assessment. Environmental Science and Pollution Research 1997, 4:223-228.
16. Hendrickson C., Horvath A., Joshi S., et al. Peer reviewed: economic input-output models for environmental life-cycle assessment. Environmental Science and Technology 1998, 32:184A-191A.
17. Guinée J.B., van den Bergh J.C.J.M., Boelens J., et al. Evaluation of risks of metal flows and accumulation in economy and environment. Ecological Economics 1999, 30:47-65.
18. Barrett J., Vallack H., Jones A., et al. A Material Flow Analysis and Ecological Footprint of York 2002, Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm.
19. Bailey R., Allen J.K., Bras B. Applying ecological input-output flow analysis to material flows in industrial systems: Part I: tracing flows. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2004, 8:45-68.
20. Galli A., Wiedmann T., Ercin E., et al. Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a "footprint family" of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecological Indicators 2012, 16:100-112.
21. Galli A., Kitzes P., Wermer P., et al. An Exploration of the Mathematics Behind the Ecological Footprint. Ecodynamics: The Prigogine Legacy 2007, WIT Press, Southampton. C.A. Brebbia (Ed.).
22. Rees W., Wackernagel M. Urban ecological footprints: why cities cannot be sustainable- and why they are a key to sustainability. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 1996, 16:223-248.
23. Wackernagel M. Can trade promote an ecologically secure world-the global economy from an ecological footprint perspective. Buffalo Environmental Law Journal 1997, 5:179.
24. Wackernagel M., Onisto L., Bello P., et al. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics 1999, 29:375-390.
25. R. Feraldi, M. Huff, A. M. Molen, et al, Life Cycle Assessment of Coconut Milk and Two Non-Dairy Milk Beverage Alternatives. http://lcacenter.org/lcaxii/final-presentations/719.pdf.
26. Bastianoni S., Niccolucci V., Pulselli R.M., et al. Indicator and indicandum: "sustainable way" vs "prevailing conditions" in the ecological footprint. Ecological Indicators 2012, 16:47-50.
27. Aldaya M.M., Chapagain A.K., Hoekstra A.Y., et al. The water footprint assessment manual: setting the global standard 2012, Routledge.
28. Hoekstra A. Human appropriation of natural capital: a comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecological Economics 2009, 68:1963-1974.
29. Hoekstra A.Y., Chapagain A.K. Water footprints of nations: water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern. Water Resources Management 2007, 21:35-48.
30. Hoekstra A.Y., Chapagain A.K., Aldaya M.M., et al. Water Footprint Manual: State of the Art 2009.
31. M. Mekonnen, A. Hoekstra, National Water Footprint Accounts: The Green, Blue and Gray Water Footprint of Production and Consumption, 2011.
32. Wiedmann T. A review of recent multi-region input-output models used for consumption-based emission and resource accounting. Ecological Economics 2009, 69:211-222.
33. Druckman A., Jackson T. The carbon footprint of UK households 1990-2004: a socio-economically disaggregated, quasi-multi-regional input-output model. Ecological Economics 2009, 68:2066-2077.
34. 2 emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2010, 107:5687-5692.
35. Hertwich E.G., Peters G.P. Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environmental Science and Technology 2009, 43:6414-6420.
36. Wiedmann T., Minx J. A definition of 'carbon footprint', CC Pertsova. Ecological Economics Research Trends 2007, 2:55-65.
37. Giljum S., Burger E., Hinterberger F., et al. A comprehensive set of resource use indicators from the micro to the macro level. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 2011, 55:300-308.
38. W.J. Baumol, W.E. Oates, The Theory of Environmental Policy, Cambridge, UK. Cambridge University Press, 1988.
39. Griffin R.C. Water Resource Economics: The Analysis of Scarcity, Policies, and Projects 2006, MIT Press.
40. Wackernagel M., Schulz N.B., Deumling D., et al. Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2002, 99:9266-9271.
41. Borucke M., Moore D., Cranston G., et al. Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere's regenerative capacity: the National Footprint Accounts' underlying methodology and framework. Ecological Indicators 2013, 24:518-533.
42. Zhao X., Chen B., Yang Z.F. National water footprint in an input-output framework-a case study of China 2002. Ecological Modelling. 220 2009, 245-253.
43. Zhao X., Yang H., Yang Z., et al. Applying the input-output method to account for water footprint and virtual water trade in the Haihe river basin in China. Environmental Science and Technology 2010, 44:9150-9156.
44. Chapagain A.K., Orr S. An improved water footprint methodology linking global consumption to local water resources: a case of Spanish tomatoes. Journal of Environmental Management 2009, 90:1219-1228.
45. Engel K.H., Saleska S.R. Subglobal regulation of the global commons: the case of climate change. Ecology Law Quarterly 2005, 32:183-233.
46. Phelps J., Webb E.L., Agrawal A. Does REDD+ threaten to recentralize forest governance?. Science 2010, 328:312-313.
47. Corbera E., Schroeder H. Governing and implementing REDD+. Environmental Science and Policy 2011, 14:89-99.
48. Ansink E. Refuting two claims about virtual water trade. Ecological Economics 2010, 69:2027-2032.
49. Wichelns D. Virtual water: a helpful perspective, but not a sufficient policy criterion. Water Resources Management 2010, 24:2203-2219.
50. Feldman M.S., Khademian A.M., Ingram H., et al. Ways of knowing and inclusive management practices. Public Administration Review 2006, 66:89-99.
51. Lejano R.P., Ingram H. Collaborative networks and new ways of knowing. Environmental Science and Policy 2009, 12:653-662.
52. Molle F., Mollinga P.P., Wester P. Hydraulic bureaucracies and the hydraulic mission: flows of water, flows of power. Water Alternatives 2009, 2:328-349.
53. Allan J.A. Virtual water-the water, food, and trade nexus. Useful concept or misleading metaphor?. Water International 2003, 28:106-113.
54. Matthews H.S., Hendrickson C.T., Weber C.L. The importance of carbon footprint estimation boundaries. Environmental Science and Technology 2008, 42:5839-5842.
55. Hall R. Land grabbing in Southern Africa: the many faces of the investor rush. Review of African Political Economy 2011, 38:193-214.
56. Velázquez E. An input-output model of water consumption: analysing intersectoral water relationships in Andalusia. Ecological Economics 2006, 56:226-240.
57. Hoekstra A.Y. The global dimension of water governance: why the river basin approach is no longer sufficient and why cooperative action at global level is needed. Water 2011, 3:21-46. 10.3390/w3010021.
58. A.Y. Hoekstra, The Global Dimension of Water Governance: Nine Reasons for Global Arrangements in Order to Cope with Local Water Problems, UNESCO-IHE Value of Water Research Report Series, no. 20, 2006.
59. Mubako S., Ruddell B., Mayer A. The relationship between water withdrawals and freshwater ecosystem water scarcity quantified at multiple scales for a great lakes watershed. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0000374. (Apr. 30, 2013).
60. Zetland D. The End of Abundance. Aguanomics Press 2011.