Sustainable Technology of 3120

Leave a Comment / Blog / By
84 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

It seems you might be interested in the Dell Latitude 3120, a laptop designed for education with a focus on durability and sustainability. Here’s how it incorporates sustainable technology:  

  • Durability: The Latitude 3120 is built to last, with rubberized edges, rounded corners, and a spill-resistant keyboard. This extends its lifespan, reducing the need for frequent replacements.  
  • Energy Efficiency: The laptop offers extended battery life and supports ExpressCharge, allowing for quick charging and minimizing downtime. This can lead to reduced energy consumption over time.  
  • Recyclable Materials: Dell is increasingly using recycled materials in their products, though specific details for the 3120 may vary.
  • Reduced Packaging: Dell aims to minimize packaging waste, contributing to environmental preservation.  

If you’re looking for more information on sustainable technology in the Dell Latitude 3120 or other laptops, you can check these resources:

  • Dell’s website: Provides detailed specifications and information about the Latitude 3120, including any sustainability certifications or initiatives.  
  • Sustainability reports: Dell publishes reports outlining their broader sustainability efforts, which may include information about specific product lines.  
  • Independent reviews: Websites like CNET, PCMag, and others often review laptops and may comment on their environmental impact.

Remember that sustainability is a broad topic, and the “greenest” laptop is often the one that lasts the longest and avoids unnecessary replacements.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

The Dell Latitude 3120 incorporates sustainable technology in several ways, primarily focused on durability and efficiency:  

  • Built to Last: The laptop is designed to withstand the rigors of daily use, especially in educational settings. Its features include:  
    • Rubberized edges and rounded corners to minimize damage from drops and bumps.  
    • Spill-resistant keyboard to protect against accidental spills.  
    • Durable chassis and screen to withstand everyday wear and tear.  
    By extending the lifespan of the device, these features reduce the need for frequent replacements, thus minimizing resource consumption and waste.
  • Energy Efficiency: The Latitude 3120 is designed to optimize power usage:
    • Long battery life to reduce the need for frequent charging.  
    • ExpressCharge technology for quick charging, minimizing downtime and energy consumption.  

Efficient power usage contributes to lower electricity consumption and a reduced carbon footprint.  

While specific details about recycled materials or packaging may vary, Dell, as a company, is increasingly focusing on incorporating recycled materials in their products and minimizing packaging waste across their product lines.  

Overall, the sustainable technology in the Dell Latitude 3120 emphasizes durability and efficiency, which are key factors in reducing environmental impact and promoting long-term sustainability.Sources and related content

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

The Dell Latitude 3120’s sustainable technology is particularly beneficial for the following groups:

  • Students: The laptop’s durability features, like the rubberized edges and spill-resistant keyboard, make it ideal for the often rough handling it might experience in a school environment. This durability translates to a longer lifespan, reducing the need for frequent replacements and minimizing waste.  
  • Schools and Educational Institutions: Schools benefit from the reduced costs associated with replacing damaged laptops. The extended lifespan and energy efficiency of the Latitude 3120 also contribute to lower overall IT costs and a smaller environmental footprint for the institution.
  • Parents: Parents can appreciate the durability of the Latitude 3120, knowing that it can withstand the rigors of daily use by their children. This can save them money on repairs or replacements.
  • The Environment: By prioritizing durability and energy efficiency, the Latitude 3120 contributes to reducing electronic waste and conserving resources. This is a benefit to the environment as a whole.

In essence, anyone who values durable, long-lasting technology with a reduced environmental impact can benefit from the sustainable features of the Dell Latitude 3120.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

The need for the Dell Latitude 3120’s sustainable technology is always relevant, but here are some situations where it becomes particularly important:

  • Education: Schools and educational institutions constantly need to refresh their technology. Choosing durable and energy-efficient laptops like the Latitude 3120 makes sense from both a financial and environmental perspective.
  • Budget-conscious buyers: The extended lifespan of the Latitude 3120 means users don’t have to replace their laptops as frequently, saving money in the long run.
  • Environmentally conscious consumers: Individuals who prioritize sustainability will find the Latitude 3120’s focus on durability and energy efficiency appealing.
  • Organizations with sustainability goals: Companies and organizations that have set environmental targets can use the Latitude 3120 to help them achieve those goals.
  • Demanding work environments: The Latitude 3120’s rugged design makes it suitable for use in environments where laptops might be exposed to rough handling, such as construction sites or field work.

Essentially, the sustainable technology of the Latitude 3120 is valuable whenever there’s a need for a reliable, long-lasting laptop that minimizes its environmental impact

.COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

You’re asking a great question that gets to the heart of why sustainable tech like the Latitude 3120 is important! Here are the key places where its features are most needed:

  • Schools and Educational Institutions: This is a primary target. Schools need devices that can handle the wear and tear of student use. Durability means less breakage, fewer replacements, and ultimately, lower costs for the institution. Plus, energy efficiency helps keep electricity bills down.  
  • Homes with Kids: Parents know that kids can be tough on electronics! The Latitude 3120’s ruggedness makes it a good choice for families, potentially saving money on repairs or replacements down the line.  
  • Businesses with Field Workers: If your employees work in environments where laptops might get bumped around (construction, fieldwork, etc.), the Latitude 3120’s durability is a major plus.
  • Organizations with Sustainability Initiatives: Companies with “green” goals will find the Latitude 3120 aligns with their values. It helps reduce e-waste and energy consumption, contributing to a smaller environmental footprint.  
  • Anywhere Durability is Key: Even if you’re just an individual who’s tired of flimsy laptops, the Latitude 3120’s design makes it a good choice for anyone who needs a device that can withstand daily use.

Essentially, the Latitude 3120’s sustainable tech is valuable anywhere that laptops are used, but especially in situations where durability, longevity, and environmental impact are important considerations.Sources and related content

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

The need for the Dell Latitude 3120’s sustainable technology arises in several ways:

  • Reducing E-waste: Durable laptops like the 3120 last longer. This means fewer devices end up in landfills, reducing the growing problem of electronic waste. E-waste contains hazardous materials, so minimizing it is crucial for environmental protection.  
  • Conserving Resources: Manufacturing new laptops requires resources like metals, plastics, and energy. By extending the lifespan of devices, we reduce the demand for new production, conserving these valuable resources.  
  • Minimizing Energy Consumption: Energy-efficient features contribute to lower electricity usage, which in turn reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with power generation. This helps combat climate change.
  • Cost Savings: For schools, businesses, and even individual consumers, durable laptops mean fewer repairs and replacements. This translates to cost savings over the long term.
  • Promoting Responsible Consumption: Choosing sustainable technology encourages a shift towards more responsible consumption habits. It sends a message that we value longevity and environmental responsibility.
  • Creating a Circular Economy: Ideally, sustainable technology is designed with recyclability in mind. This allows materials to be recovered and reused at the end of a product’s life, further minimizing waste and resource depletion. While the 3120’s specific recyclability details may vary, the longer lifespan contributes to the overall concept of a circular economy.  

In short, the need for sustainable technology like that in the Latitude 3120 arises from the desire to minimize environmental impact, conserve resources, and promote a more responsible and sustainable approach to technology consumption.Sources and related content

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

Unfortunately, there isn’t a specific, publicly available case study focused solely on the sustainable technology of the Dell Latitude 3120. However, we can piece together a sort of “case study” by examining the available information and how it applies to real-world scenarios:

Case Study: The Dell Latitude 3120 in Education

Scenario: A school district needs to refresh its student laptop fleet. They prioritize durability, affordability, and environmental responsibility.

Challenge: Previous laptops suffered frequent damage, leading to high repair/replacement costs. The district also aims to reduce its environmental footprint.

Solution: The district chooses the Dell Latitude 3120 due to:

  • Rugged Design: Rubberized edges, spill-resistant keyboard, and durable chassis minimize damage from drops and spills, common in student use.
  • Long Battery Life: Reduces the need for constant charging, saving energy and ensuring uninterrupted learning.
  • Affordable Price Point: Balances cost-effectiveness with durability and sustainability features.

Results:

  • Reduced Repair/Replacement Costs: The 3120’s durability leads to fewer broken laptops, saving the district money on repairs and replacements.
  • Lower E-waste: Extended lifespan means fewer devices end up in landfills, reducing the school’s environmental impact.
  • Energy Savings: Efficient power management contributes to lower electricity bills.
  • Positive Environmental Impact: The district demonstrates its commitment to sustainability, potentially improving its image and attracting environmentally conscious families.

Conclusion: While not a formal case study, this scenario illustrates how the Latitude 3120’s sustainable features address real-world challenges in education. The laptop’s durability, energy efficiency, and affordability make it a practical and environmentally responsible choice for schools and other organizations.

To find more specific information, you could try contacting Dell directly or searching for testimonials from schools or businesses that have deployed the Latitude 3120.

COURTESY : Sustain Life (now part of Workiva)

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

Unfortunately, Dell doesn’t seem to have published a specific white paper solely focused on the sustainable technology of the Latitude 3120. However, they do provide information about their broader sustainability initiatives and how they apply to their products, including the 3120.

Here’s how you can find relevant information:

  1. Dell’s Sustainability Website: Dell has a dedicated sustainability section on their website (usually found by searching “Dell sustainability”). This section outlines their overall commitment to environmental responsibility, including:
    • Goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions
    • Use of recycled and renewable materials
    • Energy efficiency initiatives
    • Product lifecycle management and recycling programs
  2. Product-Specific Information: While not a white paper, the Latitude 3120’s product page on Dell’s website often highlights key features related to sustainability, such as:
    • Durability testing and certifications
    • Energy-efficient components and battery life
    • Information about recycled content (if applicable)
  3. Environmental Data Sheets: For some Dell products, you can find Environmental Data Sheets that provide detailed information about the product’s environmental impact, including energy consumption, materials used, and recyclability. Check if this is available for the 3120.
  4. Contact Dell Directly: You can reach out to Dell’s customer service or sales team and inquire about specific information related to the 3120’s sustainability features. They might be able to provide more details or direct you to relevant resources.
  5. Explore Third-Party Resources: Websites and organizations focused on sustainable technology often publish articles, reports, or reviews that might include information about Dell’s products and their environmental performance.

While a dedicated white paper might not be available, by exploring these resources, you can gain a good understanding of the sustainable technology incorporated into the Dell Latitude 3120 and how it aligns with Dell’s overall commitment to environmental responsibility.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

While the Dell Latitude 3120 is primarily marketed towards education, its sustainable features can definitely have industrial applications:

1. Field Work and Remote Locations:

  • Durability: Industries like construction, oil and gas, and environmental surveying often require workers to use laptops in challenging environments. The 3120’s rugged design, with its rubberized edges, spill-resistant keyboard, and durable chassis, makes it well-suited for these conditions. It can withstand drops, bumps, and spills that would damage a typical laptop.  
  • Portability: The 3120 is compact and lightweight, making it easy to carry around in the field.
  • Long Battery Life: In remote locations where access to power might be limited, the 3120’s long battery life ensures that workers can stay productive throughout the day.

2. Manufacturing and Logistics:

  • Data Collection: In manufacturing settings, workers often need to collect data on the factory floor. The 3120’s durability and portability make it a suitable device for this purpose.
  • Inventory Management: In warehouses and logistics centers, workers can use the 3120 to scan barcodes, track inventory, and manage shipments.  
  • Reduced Downtime: The 3120’s easy serviceability and repairability minimize downtime in case of damage, which is crucial in industrial settings where operations need to run smoothly.

3. Healthcare:

  • Mobile Healthcare: Healthcare professionals who make house calls or work in mobile clinics can benefit from the 3120’s durability and portability.
  • Patient Data Management: In hospitals and clinics, the 3120 can be used to access and update patient records, with its spill-resistant keyboard adding an extra layer of protection in a hygienic environment.

4. Other Industries:

  • Agriculture: Farmers and agricultural workers can use the 3120 to collect data on crops, soil conditions, and livestock.
  • Transportation: Truck drivers, delivery personnel, and other transportation workers can use the 3120 for navigation, communication, and logistics management.

In general, the Dell Latitude 3120’s combination of durability, portability, long battery life, and ease of serviceability makes it a viable option for various industrial applications where a reliable and sustainable laptop is needed.Sources and related content

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3120 ?

While Dell doesn’t publish specific R&D details for individual models like the 3120, we can infer the general focus areas they likely prioritize based on industry trends and their public commitments to sustainability:

1. Materials Science:

  • Recycled Plastics: Exploring ways to increase the percentage of recycled plastics used in the chassis and components. This involves researching sources, ensuring quality, and potentially developing new recycling processes.
  • Bio-based Plastics: Investigating the use of plastics derived from renewable resources (like sugarcane or corn) to reduce reliance on petroleum-based plastics.
  • Recycled Metals: Examining how to incorporate recycled aluminum, magnesium, or other metals in the laptop’s construction.
  • Sustainable Packaging: Researching and developing packaging materials that are 100% recycled or renewable, minimizing waste and environmental impact.  

2. Durability and Longevity:

  • Advanced Materials: Exploring new materials or composites that enhance the laptop’s resistance to drops, spills, and general wear and tear. This could involve research into stronger polymers, specialized coatings, or even flexible displays.
  • Design Optimization: Continuously refining the laptop’s design to improve its structural integrity and prevent common failure points (like hinge issues or keyboard damage).
  • Testing and Validation: Implementing rigorous testing procedures to ensure the laptop can withstand harsh conditions and meet durability standards.

3. Energy Efficiency:

  • Component Optimization: Working with suppliers to develop more energy-efficient processors, displays, and other components. This could involve exploring new semiconductor technologies or display backlighting systems.
  • Power Management: Developing sophisticated power management software and firmware to optimize battery life and minimize energy consumption during various usage scenarios.
  • Thermal Management: Researching innovative cooling solutions to dissipate heat efficiently without relying on energy-intensive fans.

4. Recyclability and End-of-Life Management:

  • Design for Disassembly: Designing the laptop with easy disassembly in mind, making it simpler to separate components for recycling or reuse.
  • Material Identification: Implementing clear labeling or material coding to facilitate proper sorting and recycling at the end of the laptop’s life.
  • Take-back Programs: Expanding and improving take-back programs to encourage responsible recycling and reduce e-waste.  

5. Supply Chain Sustainability:

  • Responsible Sourcing: Working with suppliers to ensure that materials are sourced ethically and with minimal environmental impact. This includes addressing issues like conflict minerals and labor practices.
  • Carbon Footprint Reduction: Optimizing manufacturing and transportation processes to minimize greenhouse gas emissions throughout the supply chain.

It’s important to remember that R&D is an ongoing process. Dell and other manufacturers are constantly exploring new technologies and approaches to make their products more sustainable. While specific details about the 3120’s development are not readily available, these general areas likely represent the core focus of their efforts.Sources and related content

COURTESY : Carnegie India

References

  1. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Purvis, Ben; Mao, Yong; Robinson, Darren (2019). “Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins”. Sustainability Science. 14 (3): 681–695. Bibcode:2019SuSc…14..681P. doi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5. ISSN 1862-4065.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  2. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Ramsey, Jeffry L. (2015). “On Not Defining Sustainability”. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 28 (6): 1075–1087. Bibcode:2015JAEE…28.1075R. doi:10.1007/s10806-015-9578-3. ISSN 1187-7863. S2CID 146790960.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Kotzé, Louis J.; Kim, Rakhyun E.; Burdon, Peter; du Toit, Louise; Glass, Lisa-Maria; Kashwan, Prakash; Liverman, Diana; Montesano, Francesco S.; Rantala, Salla (2022). “Planetary Integrity”. In Sénit, Carole-Anne; Biermann, Frank; Hickmann, Thomas (eds.). The Political Impact of the Sustainable Development Goals: Transforming Governance Through Global Goals?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 140–171. doi:10.1017/9781009082945.007. ISBN 978-1-316-51429-0.
  4. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Bosselmann, Klaus (2010). “Losing the Forest for the Trees: Environmental Reductionism in the Law”. Sustainability. 2 (8): 2424–2448. doi:10.3390/su2082424. hdl:10535/6499. ISSN 2071-1050.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 International License
  5. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u Berg, Christian (2020). Sustainable action: overcoming the barriers. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-429-57873-1. OCLC 1124780147.
  6. ^ Jump up to:a b c “Sustainability”. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  7. ^ “Sustainable Development”. UNESCO. 3 August 2015. Retrieved 20 January 2022.
  8. ^ Jump up to:a b Kuhlman, Tom; Farrington, John (2010). “What is Sustainability?”. Sustainability. 2 (11): 3436–3448. doi:10.3390/su2113436. ISSN 2071-1050.
  9. ^ Nelson, Anitra (31 January 2024). “Degrowth as a Concept and Practice: Introduction”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
  10. ^ Jump up to:a b c d UNEP (2011) Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth, A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel. Fischer-Kowalski, M., Swilling, M., von Weizsäcker, E.U., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, Y., Crane, W., Krausmann, F., Eisenmenger, N., Giljum, S., Hennicke, P., Romero Lankao, P., Siriban Manalang, A., Sewerin, S.
  11. ^ Jump up to:a b c Vadén, T.; Lähde, V.; Majava, A.; Järvensivu, P.; Toivanen, T.; Hakala, E.; Eronen, J.T. (2020). “Decoupling for ecological sustainability: A categorisation and review of research literature”. Environmental Science & Policy. 112: 236–244. Bibcode:2020ESPol.112..236V. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.016. PMC 7330600. PMID 32834777.
  12. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Parrique T., Barth J., Briens F., C. Kerschner, Kraus-Polk A., Kuokkanen A., Spangenberg J.H., 2019. Decoupling debunked: Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. European Environmental Bureau.
  13. ^ Parrique, T., Barth, J., Briens, F., Kerschner, C., Kraus-Polk, A., Kuokkanen, A., & Spangenberg, J. H. (2019). Decoupling debunked. Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability. A study edited by the European Environment Bureau EEB.
  14. ^ Hardyment, Richard (2024). Measuring Good Business: Making Sense of Environmental, Social & Governance Data. Abingdon: Routledge. ISBN 9781032601199.
  15. ^ Bell, Simon; Morse, Stephen (2012). Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable?. Abington: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.
  16. ^ Jump up to:a b c Howes, Michael; Wortley, Liana; Potts, Ruth; Dedekorkut-Howes, Aysin; Serrao-Neumann, Silvia; Davidson, Julie; Smith, Timothy; Nunn, Patrick (2017). “Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?”. Sustainability. 9 (2): 165. doi:10.3390/su9020165. hdl:10453/90953. ISSN 2071-1050.
  17. ^ Jump up to:a b Kinsley, M. and Lovins, L.H. (September 1997). “Paying for Growth, Prospering from Development.” Archived 17 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine Retrieved 15 June 2009.
  18. ^ Jump up to:a b Sustainable Shrinkage: Envisioning a Smaller, Stronger Economy Archived 11 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine. Thesolutionsjournal.com. Retrieved 13 March 2016.
  19. ^ Apetrei, Cristina I.; Caniglia, Guido; von Wehrden, Henrik; Lang, Daniel J. (1 May 2021). “Just another buzzword? A systematic literature review of knowledge-related concepts in sustainability science”. Global Environmental Change. 68: 102222. Bibcode:2021GEC….6802222A. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102222. ISSN 0959-3780.
  20. ^ Jump up to:a b c Benson, Melinda Harm; Craig, Robin Kundis (2014). “End of Sustainability”. Society & Natural Resources. 27 (7): 777–782. Bibcode:2014SNatR..27..777B. doi:10.1080/08941920.2014.901467. ISSN 0894-1920. S2CID 67783261.
  21. ^ Jump up to:a b c Stockholm+50: Unlocking a Better Future. Stockholm Environment Institute (Report). 18 May 2022. doi:10.51414/sei2022.011. S2CID 248881465.
  22. ^ Jump up to:a b Scoones, Ian (2016). “The Politics of Sustainability and Development”. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 41 (1): 293–319. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090039. ISSN 1543-5938. S2CID 156534921.
  23. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i Harrington, Lisa M. Butler (2016). “Sustainability Theory and Conceptual Considerations: A Review of Key Ideas for Sustainability, and the Rural Context”. Papers in Applied Geography. 2 (4): 365–382. Bibcode:2016PAGeo…2..365H. doi:10.1080/23754931.2016.1239222. ISSN 2375-4931. S2CID 132458202.
  24. ^ Jump up to:a b c d United Nations General Assembly (1987) Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment.
  25. ^ United Nations General Assembly (20 March 1987). “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future; Transmitted to the General Assembly as an Annex to document A/42/427 – Development and International Co-operation: Environment; Our Common Future, Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development; Paragraph 1″. United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved 1 March 2010.
  26. ^ “University of Alberta: What is sustainability?” (PDF). mcgill.ca. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
  27. ^ Jump up to:a b Halliday, Mike (21 November 2016). “How sustainable is sustainability?”. Oxford College of Procurement and Supply. Retrieved 12 July 2022.
  28. ^ Harper, Douglas. “sustain”. Online Etymology Dictionary.
  29. ^ Onions, Charles, T. (ed) (1964). The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 2095.
  30. ^ “Sustainability Theories”. World Ocean Review. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  31. ^ Compare: “sustainability”. Oxford English Dictionary (Online ed.). Oxford University Press. (Subscription or participating institution membership required.) The English-language word had a legal technical sense from 1835 and a resource-management connotation from 1953.
  32. ^ “Hans Carl von Carlowitz and Sustainability”. Environment and Society Portal. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
  33. ^ Dresden, SLUB. “Sylvicultura Oeconomica, Oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung Zur Wilden Baum-Zucht”. digital.slub-dresden.de (in German). Retrieved 28 March 2022.
  34. ^ Von Carlowitz, H.C. & Rohr, V. (1732) Sylvicultura Oeconomica, oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung zur Wilden Baum Zucht, Leipzig; translated from German as cited in Friederich, Simon; Symons, Jonathan (15 November 2022). “Operationalising sustainability? Why sustainability fails as an investment criterion for safeguarding the future”. Global Policy. 14: 1758–5899.13160. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.13160. ISSN 1758-5880. S2CID 253560289.
  35. ^ Basler, Ernst (1972). Strategy of Progress: Environmental Pollution, Habitat Scarcity and Future Research (originally, Strategie des Fortschritts: Umweltbelastung Lebensraumverknappung and Zukunftsforshung). BLV Publishing Company.
  36. ^ Gadgil, M.; Berkes, F. (1991). “Traditional Resource Management Systems”. Resource Management and Optimization. 8: 127–141.
  37. ^ “Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 September 2005, 60/1. 2005 World Summit Outcome” (PDF). United Nations General Assembly. 2005. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  38. ^ Barbier, Edward B. (July 1987). “The Concept of Sustainable Economic Development”. Environmental Conservation. 14 (2): 101–110. Bibcode:1987EnvCo..14..101B. doi:10.1017/S0376892900011449. ISSN 1469-4387.
  39. ^ Jump up to:a b Bosselmann, K. (2022) Chapter 2: A normative approach to environmental governance: sustainability at the apex of environmental law, Research Handbook on Fundamental Concepts of Environmental Law, edited by Douglas Fisher
  40. ^ Jump up to:a b “Agenda 21” (PDF). United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. 1992. Retrieved 17 January 2022.
  41. ^ Jump up to:a b c d United Nations (2015) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1 Archived 28 November 2020 at the Wayback Machine)
  42. ^ Scott Cato, M. (2009). Green Economics. London: Earthscan, pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-1-84407-571-3.
  43. ^ Jump up to:a b Obrecht, Andreas; Pham-Truffert, Myriam; Spehn, Eva; Payne, Davnah; Altermatt, Florian; Fischer, Manuel; Passarello, Cristian; Moersberger, Hannah; Schelske, Oliver; Guntern, Jodok; Prescott, Graham (5 February 2021). “Achieving the SDGs with Biodiversity”. Swiss Academies Factsheet. Vol. 16, no. 1. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4457298.
  44. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Raskin, P.; Banuri, T.; Gallopín, G.; Gutman, P.; Hammond, A.; Kates, R.; Swart, R. (2002). Great transition: the promise and lure of the times ahead. Boston: Stockholm Environment Institute. ISBN 0-9712418-1-3. OCLC 49987854.
  45. ^ Ekins, Paul; Zenghelis, Dimitri (2021). “The costs and benefits of environmental sustainability”. Sustainability Science. 16 (3): 949–965. Bibcode:2021SuSc…16..949E. doi:10.1007/s11625-021-00910-5. PMC 7960882. PMID 33747239.
  46. ^ William L. Thomas, ed. (1956). Man’s role in changing the face of the earth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-79604-3. OCLC 276231.
  47. ^ Carson, Rachel (2002) [1st. Pub. Houghton Mifflin, 1962]. Silent Spring. Mariner Books. ISBN 978-0-618-24906-0.
  48. ^ Arrhenius, Svante (1896). “XXXI. On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground”. The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science. 41 (251): 237–276. doi:10.1080/14786449608620846. ISSN 1941-5982.
  49. ^ Jump up to:a b c UN (1973) Report of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, A/CONF.48/14/Rev.1, Stockholm, 5–16 June 1972
  50. ^ UNEP (2021). “Making Peace With Nature”. UNEP – UN Environment Programme. Retrieved 30 March 2022.
  51. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Ripple, William J.; Wolf, Christopher; Newsome, Thomas M.; Galetti, Mauro; Alamgir, Mohammed; Crist, Eileen; Mahmoud, Mahmoud I.; Laurance, William F.; 15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries (2017). “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity: A Second Notice”. BioScience. 67 (12): 1026–1028. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125. hdl:11336/71342. ISSN 0006-3568.
  52. ^ Crutzen, Paul J. (2002). “Geology of mankind”. Nature. 415 (6867): 23. Bibcode:2002Natur.415…23C. doi:10.1038/415023a. ISSN 0028-0836. PMID 11780095. S2CID 9743349.
  53. ^ Jump up to:a b Wilhelm Krull, ed. (2000). Zukunftsstreit (in German). Weilerwist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. ISBN 3-934730-17-5. OCLC 52639118.
  54. ^ Redclift, Michael (2005). “Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age”. Sustainable Development. 13 (4): 212–227. doi:10.1002/sd.281. ISSN 0968-0802.
  55. ^ Daly, Herman E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development (PDF). Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 0-8070-4708-2. OCLC 33946953.
  56. ^ United Nations (2017) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 6 July 2017, Work of the Statistical Commission pertaining to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/71/313)
  57. ^ “UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative”. UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative. Retrieved 24 January 2022.
  58. ^ PEP (2016) Poverty-Environment Partnership Joint Paper | June 2016 Getting to Zero – A Poverty, Environment and Climate Call to Action for the Sustainable Development Goals
  59. ^ Boyer, Robert H. W.; Peterson, Nicole D.; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). “Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward”. Sustainability. 8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878.
  60. ^ Doğu, Feriha Urfalı; Aras, Lerzan (2019). “Measuring Social Sustainability with the Developed MCSA Model: Güzelyurt Case”. Sustainability. 11 (9): 2503. doi:10.3390/su11092503. ISSN 2071-1050.
  61. ^ Davidson, Mark (2010). “Social Sustainability and the City: Social sustainability and city”. Geography Compass. 4 (7): 872–880. doi:10.1111/j.1749-8198.2010.00339.x.
  62. ^ Missimer, Merlina; Robèrt, Karl-Henrik; Broman, Göran (2017). “A strategic approach to social sustainability – Part 2: a principle-based definition”. Journal of Cleaner Production. 140: 42–52. Bibcode:2017JCPro.140…42M. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.059.
  63. ^ Boyer, Robert; Peterson, Nicole; Arora, Poonam; Caldwell, Kevin (2016). “Five Approaches to Social Sustainability and an Integrated Way Forward”. Sustainability. 8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878. ISSN 2071-1050.
  64. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
  65. ^ Liam Magee; Andy Scerri; Paul James; James A. Thom; Lin Padgham; Sarah Hickmott; Hepu Deng; Felicity Cahill (2013). “Reframing social sustainability reporting: Towards an engaged approach”. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 15 (1): 225–243. Bibcode:2013EDSus..15..225M. doi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2. S2CID 153452740.
  66. ^ Cohen, J. E. (2006). “Human Population: The Next Half Century.”. In Kennedy, D. (ed.). Science Magazine’s State of the Planet 2006-7. London: Island Press. pp. 13–21. ISBN 9781597266246.
  67. ^ Jump up to:a b c Aggarwal, Dhruvak; Esquivel, Nhilce; Hocquet, Robin; Martin, Kristiina; Mungo, Carol; Nazareth, Anisha; Nikam, Jaee; Odenyo, Javan; Ravindran, Bhuvan; Kurinji, L. S.; Shawoo, Zoha; Yamada, Kohei (28 April 2022). Charting a youth vision for a just and sustainable future (PDF) (Report). Stockholm Environment Institute. doi:10.51414/sei2022.010.
  68. ^ “The Regional Institute – WACOSS Housing and Sustainable Communities Indicators Project”. www.regional.org.au. 2012. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
  69. ^ Virtanen, Pirjo Kristiina; Siragusa, Laura; Guttorm, Hanna (2020). “Introduction: toward more inclusive definitions of sustainability”. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. 43: 77–82. Bibcode:2020COES…43…77V. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2020.04.003. S2CID 219663803.
  70. ^ “Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development”. United Cities and Local Governments. Archived from the original on 3 October 2013.
  71. ^ James, Paul; Magee, Liam (2016). “Domains of Sustainability”. In Farazmand, Ali (ed.). Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Cham: Springer International Publishing. pp. 1–17. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_2760-1. ISBN 978-3-319-31816-5. Retrieved 28 March 2022.
  72. ^ Jump up to:a b Robert U. Ayres & Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & John M. Gowdy, 1998. “Viewpoint: Weak versus Strong Sustainability“, Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 98-103/3, Tinbergen Institute.
  73. ^ Pearce, David W.; Atkinson, Giles D. (1993). “Capital theory and the measurement of sustainable development: an indicator of “weak” sustainability”. Ecological Economics. 8 (2): 103–108. Bibcode:1993EcoEc…8..103P. doi:10.1016/0921-8009(93)90039-9.
  74. ^ Ayres, Robert; van den Berrgh, Jeroen; Gowdy, John (2001). “Strong versus Weak Sustainability”. Environmental Ethics. 23 (2): 155–168. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200123225. ISSN 0163-4275.
  75. ^ Cabeza Gutés, Maite (1996). “The concept of weak sustainability”. Ecological Economics. 17 (3): 147–156. Bibcode:1996EcoEc..17..147C. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(96)80003-6.
  76. ^ Bosselmann, Klaus (2017). The principle of sustainability: transforming law and governance (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4724-8128-3. OCLC 951915998.
  77. ^ Jump up to:a b WEF (2020) Nature Risk Rising: Why the Crisis Engulfing Nature Matters for Business and the Economy New Nature Economy, World Economic Forum in collaboration with PwC
  78. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
  79. ^ Jump up to:a b Hardyment, Richard (2 February 2024). Measuring Good Business. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003457732. ISBN 978-1-003-45773-2.
  80. ^ Jump up to:a b Bell, Simon and Morse, Stephen 2008. Sustainability Indicators. Measuring the Immeasurable? 2nd edn. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.
  81. ^ Dalal-Clayton, Barry and Sadler, Barry 2009. Sustainability Appraisal: A Sourcebook and Reference Guide to International Experience. London: Earthscan. ISBN 978-1-84407-357-3.[page needed]
  82. ^ Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. [1] Archived 2011-12-18 at the Wayback Machine
  83. ^ Wackernagel, Mathis; Lin, David; Evans, Mikel; Hanscom, Laurel; Raven, Peter (2019). “Defying the Footprint Oracle: Implications of Country Resource Trends”. Sustainability. 11 (7): 2164. doi:10.3390/su11072164.
  84. ^ “Sustainable Development visualized”. Sustainability concepts. Retrieved 24 March 2022.
  85. ^ Jump up to:a b Steffen, Will; Rockström, Johan; Cornell, Sarah; Fetzer, Ingo; Biggs, Oonsie; Folke, Carl; Reyers, Belinda (15 January 2015). “Planetary Boundaries – an update”. Stockholm Resilience Centre. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  86. ^ “Ten years of nine planetary boundaries”. Stockholm Resilience Centre. November 2019. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
  87. ^ Persson, Linn; Carney Almroth, Bethanie M.; Collins, Christopher D.; Cornell, Sarah; de Wit, Cynthia A.; Diamond, Miriam L.; Fantke, Peter; Hassellöv, Martin; MacLeod, Matthew; Ryberg, Morten W.; Søgaard Jørgensen, Peter (1 February 2022). “Outside the Safe Operating Space of the Planetary Boundary for Novel Entities”. Environmental Science & Technology. 56 (3): 1510–1521. Bibcode:2022EnST…56.1510P. doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c04158. ISSN 0013-936X. PMC 8811958. PMID 35038861.
  88. ^ Ehrlich, P.R.; Holden, J.P. (1974). “Human Population and the global environment”. American Scientist. Vol. 62, no. 3. pp. 282–292.
  89. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Wiedmann, Thomas; Lenzen, Manfred; Keyßer, Lorenz T.; Steinberger, Julia K. (2020). “Scientists’ warning on affluence”. Nature Communications. 11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107W. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y. ISSN 2041-1723. PMC 7305220. PMID 32561753. Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  90. ^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis (PDF). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
  91. ^ TEEB (2010), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB
  92. ^ Jump up to:a b c Jaeger, William K. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
  93. ^ Groth, Christian (2014). Lecture notes in Economic Growth, (mimeo), Chapter 8: Choice of social discount rate. Copenhagen University.
  94. ^ UNEP, FAO (2020). UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. 48p.
  95. ^ Raworth, Kate (2017). Doughnut economics: seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist. London: Random House. ISBN 978-1-84794-138-1. OCLC 974194745.
  96. ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Berg, Christian (2017). “Shaping the Future Sustainably – Types of Barriers and Tentative Action Principles (chapter in: Future Scenarios of Global Cooperation—Practices and Challenges)”. Global Dialogues (14). Centre For Global Cooperation Research (KHK/GCR21), Nora Dahlhaus and Daniela Weißkopf (eds.). doi:10.14282/2198-0403-GD-14. ISSN 2198-0403.
  97. ^ Jump up to:a b c d Pickering, Jonathan; Hickmann, Thomas; Bäckstrand, Karin; Kalfagianni, Agni; Bloomfield, Michael; Mert, Ayşem; Ransan-Cooper, Hedda; Lo, Alex Y. (2022). “Democratising sustainability transformations: Assessing the transformative potential of democratic practices in environmental governance”. Earth System Governance. 11: 100131. Bibcode:2022ESGov..1100131P. doi:10.1016/j.esg.2021.100131.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  98. ^ European Environment Agency. (2019). Sustainability transitions: policy and practice. LU: Publications Office. doi:10.2800/641030. ISBN 9789294800862.
  99. ^ Noura Guimarães, Lucas (2020). “Introduction”. The regulation and policy of Latin American energy transitions. Elsevier. pp. xxix–xxxviii. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819521-5.00026-7. ISBN 978-0-12-819521-5. S2CID 241093198.
  100. ^ Kuenkel, Petra (2019). Stewarding Sustainability Transformations: An Emerging Theory and Practice of SDG Implementation. Cham: Springer. ISBN 978-3-030-03691-1. OCLC 1080190654.
  101. ^ Fletcher, Charles; Ripple, William J.; Newsome, Thomas; Barnard, Phoebe; Beamer, Kamanamaikalani; Behl, Aishwarya; Bowen, Jay; Cooney, Michael; Crist, Eileen; Field, Christopher; Hiser, Krista; Karl, David M.; King, David A.; Mann, Michael E.; McGregor, Davianna P.; Mora, Camilo; Oreskes, Naomi; Wilson, Michael (4 April 2024). “Earth at risk: An urgent call to end the age of destruction and forge a just and sustainable future”. PNAS Nexus. 3 (4): pgae106. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae106. PMC 10986754. PMID 38566756. Retrieved 4 April 2024.  Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
  102. ^ Smith, E. T. (23 January 2024). “Practising Commoning”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
  103. ^ Jump up to:a b Haberl, Helmut; Wiedenhofer, Dominik; Virág, Doris; Kalt, Gerald; Plank, Barbara; Brockway, Paul; Fishman, Tomer; Hausknost, Daniel; Krausmann, Fridolin; Leon-Gruchalski, Bartholomäus; Mayer, Andreas (2020). “A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights”. Environmental Research Letters. 15 (6): 065003. Bibcode:2020ERL….15f5003H. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a. ISSN 1748-9326. S2CID 216453887.
  104. ^ Pigou, Arthur Cecil (1932). The Economics of Welfare (PDF) (4th ed.). London: Macmillan.
  105. ^ Jaeger, William K. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
  106. ^ Roger Perman; Yue Ma; Michael Common; David Maddison; James Mcgilvray (2011). Natural resource and environmental economics (4th ed.). Harlow, Essex: Pearson Addison Wesley. ISBN 978-0-321-41753-4. OCLC 704557307.
  107. ^ Jump up to:a b Anderies, John M.; Janssen, Marco A. (16 October 2012). “Elinor Ostrom (1933–2012): Pioneer in the Interdisciplinary Science of Coupled Social-Ecological Systems”. PLOS Biology. 10 (10): e1001405. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001405. ISSN 1544-9173. PMC 3473022.
  108. ^ “The Nobel Prize: Women Who Changed the World”. thenobelprize.org. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
  109. ^ Ghisellini, Patrizia; Cialani, Catia; Ulgiati, Sergio (15 February 2016). “A review on circular economy: the expected transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems”. Journal of Cleaner Production. Towards Post Fossil Carbon Societies: Regenerative and Preventative Eco-Industrial Development. 114: 11–32. Bibcode:2016JCPro.114…11G. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007. ISSN 0959-6526.
  110. ^ Nobre, Gustavo Cattelan; Tavares, Elaine (10 September 2021). “The quest for a circular economy final definition: A scientific perspective”. Journal of Cleaner Production. 314: 127973. Bibcode:2021JCPro.31427973N. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127973. ISSN 0959-6526.
  111. ^ Zhexembayeva, N. (May 2007). “Becoming Sustainable: Tools and Resources for Successful Organizational Transformation”. Center for Business as an Agent of World Benefit. Case Western University. Archived from the original on 13 June 2010.
  112. ^ “About Us”. Sustainable Business Institute. Archived from the original on 17 May 2009.
  113. ^ “About the WBCSD”. World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Archived from the original on 9 September 2007. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
  114. ^ “Supply Chain Sustainability | UN Global Compact”. www.unglobalcompact.org. Retrieved 4 May 2022.
  115. ^ “”Statement of Faith and Spiritual Leaders on the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP21 in Paris in December 2015″” (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 21 March 2022.
  116. ^ “The Statement — Interfaith Climate”. www.interfaithclimate.org. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
  117. ^ McDilda, Diane Gow (2007). The everything green living book: easy ways to conserve energy, protect your family’s health, and help save the environment. Avon, Mass.: Adams Media. ISBN 978-1-59869-425-3. OCLC 124074971.
  118. ^ Gambino, Megan (15 March 2012). “Is it Too Late for Sustainable Development?”. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
  119. ^ Blühdorn (2017). “Post-capitalism, post-growth, post-consumerism? Eco-political hopes beyond sustainability”. Global Discourse. 7 (1): 42–61. doi:10.1080/23269995.2017.1300415. ISSN 2043-7897.
  120. ^ Watson, Bruce (20 August 2016). “The troubling evolution of corporate greenwashing”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 18 October 2016.
  121. ^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. www.bloomberg.ca. BNN Bloomberg. 18 August 2018.
  122. ^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. The Conversation. 18 August 2011.
  123. ^ Ebrahimi Sirizi, Mohammad; Taghavi Zirvani, Esmaeil; Esmailzadeh, Abdulsalam; Khosravian, Jafar; Ahmadi, Reyhaneh; Mijani, Naeim; Soltannia, Reyhaneh; Jokar Arsanjani, Jamal (19 October 2023). “A scenario-based multi-criteria decision-making approach for allocation of pistachio processing facilities: A case study of Zarand, Iran”. Sustainability. 15 (20): 15054. doi:10.3390/su152015054. ISSN 2071-1050.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Translate »