Sustainable Technology of 3320

Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

Sustainable technology in 3320 could encompass a wide range of advancements, but here are some potential areas of focus:

• Renewable Energy: Fusion power may be a viable and widely used energy source, supplemented by advanced solar, wind, and geothermal technologies. Energy storage solutions would likely be highly efficient and integrated into infrastructure.
• Resource Management: Advanced recycling and resource recovery systems could minimize waste and maximize the reuse of materials. Technologies for extracting resources from unconventional sources, like asteroids or the deep sea, may be in use, but with careful consideration of environmental impact.
• Environmental Remediation: Technologies for cleaning up pollution and restoring ecosystems could be highly advanced. This might include atmospheric carbon capture, ocean cleanup systems, and methods for revitalizing damaged habitats.
• Sustainable Agriculture: Precision agriculture techniques, vertical farming, and lab-grown food could be widely used to increase food production while minimizing environmental impact.
• Transportation: Electric and autonomous vehicles could be the norm, powered by renewable energy sources. Advanced air travel and high-speed transportation systems could be developed to reduce travel time and environmental impact.
• Circular Economy: Products could be designed for disassembly and reuse, minimizing waste and promoting a circular economy. Advanced materials with long lifespans and biodegradability could be in use.
• Smart Cities: Urban areas could be highly efficient and sustainable, with integrated systems for managing energy, water, and waste. Buildings could be self-sufficient and generate their own resources.
• Biotechnology: Advances in genetic engineering and synthetic biology could lead to the development of sustainable materials, biofuels, and bioremediation technologies.

It’s important to note that these are just potential areas of focus. The actual development of sustainable technology in 3320 would depend on a variety of factors, including scientific advancements, economic conditions, and societal priorities.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

It’s fascinating to speculate about sustainable technology in 3320! Here’s a breakdown of potential advancements, keeping in mind this is imaginative forecasting:

Core Principles:

• Harmony with Nature: Technology seamlessly integrates with ecosystems, minimizing environmental disruption and even aiding in ecological restoration.
• Resource Optimization: Extreme efficiency in resource use, with closed-loop systems for material recycling and minimal waste generation.
• Resilience and Adaptability: Technologies designed to withstand environmental changes and adapt to evolving needs.

Possible Technologies:

• Energy:
  • Fusion Power Dominance: Safe, clean, and abundant fusion energy could be the primary power source.
  • Space-Based Solar: Massive solar arrays in orbit capture sunlight without atmospheric interference, beaming energy to Earth.
  • Advanced Geothermal: Deep-Earth geothermal taps into virtually limitless energy, with minimal environmental impact.
• Materials:
  • Bio-Integrated Materials: Materials grown or engineered to seamlessly integrate with living systems, for construction, medicine, and more.
  • Adaptive Materials: Materials that change properties on demand (shape, color, strength) for dynamic applications.
  • Self-Healing Materials: Materials that automatically repair damage, extending lifespan and reducing waste.
• Environment:
  • Global Climate Regulation: Technologies to actively manage climate systems, potentially including carbon capture and solar radiation management.
  • Ecosystem Restoration: Advanced techniques to revitalize damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs.
  • Pollution Remediation: Nanotechnology and biotechnology to break down pollutants and restore environmental health.
• Food:
  • Personalized Nutrition: Food tailored to individual needs, grown in highly efficient vertical farms or even synthesized.
  • Sustainable Aquaculture: Ocean farming that’s both productive and environmentally responsible, with minimal impact on marine ecosystems.
  • Lab-Grown Food Revolution: Meat and other food products grown in labs, reducing land use and environmental impact.
• Transportation:
  • Hyperloop Networks: High-speed transport systems that minimize friction and energy use, connecting cities and regions.
  • Personal Aerial Mobility: Safe and efficient flying vehicles for individual transport, reducing traffic congestion.
  • Space Travel: Routine access to space for exploration, resource acquisition, and even habitation.
• Cities:
  • Self-Sufficient Cities: Urban areas that generate their own energy, food, and resources, minimizing reliance on external inputs.
  • Smart Infrastructure: Networks of sensors and AI to optimize resource use, manage traffic, and enhance quality of life.
  • Green Cities: Urban environments with abundant green spaces, promoting biodiversity and psychological well-being.

Important Considerations:

• Ethical Development: Technology in 3320 would need to be guided by strong ethical principles, ensuring equitable access and environmental responsibility.
• Social Impact: Sustainable technologies would likely reshape society, impacting jobs, economies, and social structures.
• Unforeseen Consequences: Even with careful planning, new technologies can have unexpected effects, requiring ongoing adaptation and learning.

Let me know if you’d like me to elaborate on any of these areas!

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

It’s more accurate to say that sustainable technology in 3320 would be essential for everyone. Here’s why:

• Planetary Health: By 3320, the consequences of unsustainable practices might be dire. Sustainable technology would be crucial for maintaining a habitable planet, addressing climate change, and preserving biodiversity.
• Resource Scarcity: Even with resource extraction from space or the deep sea, efficient use and recycling would be vital. Sustainable technologies would ensure access to essential resources for everyone.
• Economic Stability: A sustainable economy would be necessary for long-term prosperity. This would involve circular economies, responsible resource management, and minimizing environmental costs.
• Social Equity: Sustainable technology could help bridge gaps in access to resources and opportunities. This could involve decentralized energy systems, localized food production, and affordable sustainable housing.
• Quality of Life: Sustainable technologies would likely enhance quality of life for everyone. This could include clean energy, healthy environments, efficient transportation, and access to advanced healthcare.

In essence, sustainable technology in 3320 would be a necessity for human survival and well-being. It would be deeply integrated into all aspects of life, ensuring a healthy planet and a thriving society for all.

It’s important to remember that this is a hypothetical scenario. The actual development of sustainable technology in the future will depend on the choices we make today. By prioritizing sustainability now, we can increase the chances of a positive future for all.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

That’s a great question that gets at the heart of why we talk about sustainable technology in the first place! While we’re speculating about the year 3320, the need for sustainable technology is urgent and immediate. Here’s why:

• Environmental Crisis: We’re already facing the consequences of climate change, pollution, and resource depletion. The longer we wait to adopt sustainable practices, the more severe these problems will become.
• Population Growth: The global population continues to increase, putting further strain on resources and ecosystems. Sustainable technologies are needed to support a growing population without exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity.
• Economic Imperative: Sustainable practices are not just good for the environment, they’re also good for the economy. Investing in renewable energy, resource efficiency, and circular economies can create jobs, reduce costs, and drive innovation.
• Social Justice: Sustainable technologies can help address inequalities in access to resources and opportunities. This includes things like clean energy, affordable housing, and sustainable agriculture.

In short, we need sustainable technology NOW to:

• Mitigate climate change and prevent its worst impacts.
• Conserve resources and ensure their availability for future generations.
• Protect biodiversity and maintain healthy ecosystems.
• Build a more equitable and just society where everyone has access to basic necessities.

While the specific technologies of 3320 are fascinating to imagine, it’s crucial to focus on developing and implementing sustainable solutions today. The future we envision depends on the actions we take now.

Do you want to explore some of the sustainable technologies that are being developed and implemented right now? I can provide information on renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, green building, and more!

COURTESY :Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

You’re right to think about the “where” of sustainable technology! It’s not just about what it is, but where it’s needed and applied. In 3320, sustainable technology would likely be integrated into almost every facet of life and across diverse locations. Here are some key areas:

1. Urban Centers:

• Smart Cities: Sustainable tech would be the foundation of urban life, optimizing energy use, managing waste, and providing efficient transportation.
• Green Buildings: Buildings would be self-sufficient, generating their own energy, recycling water, and incorporating green spaces.
• Vertical Farms: Urban agriculture would maximize food production in limited spaces, reducing transportation needs and environmental impact.

2. Rural Areas:

• Sustainable Agriculture: Precision farming, renewable energy-powered machinery, and efficient irrigation would increase food production while minimizing environmental impact.
• Decentralized Energy Systems: Rural communities might rely on localized renewable energy sources like wind, solar, and biogas.
• Ecological Restoration: Technologies to revitalize ecosystems and preserve biodiversity would be crucial in rural landscapes.

3. Transportation Networks:

• Hyperloop Systems: These high-speed networks would connect cities and regions, reducing travel time and energy consumption.
• Personal Aerial Mobility: Flying vehicles would require sustainable energy sources and efficient air traffic management systems.
• Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Widespread charging stations powered by renewable energy would support the transition to electric vehicles.

4. Space:

• Space-Based Solar: Massive solar arrays in orbit would require sustainable technologies for construction, maintenance, and energy transmission.
• Resource Extraction: Mining asteroids or other celestial bodies for resources would need to be done sustainably to avoid environmental damage.
• Space Habitats: Long-term space missions or settlements would need self-sufficient systems for energy, food production, and waste recycling.

5. Oceans:

• Sustainable Aquaculture: Ocean farming would need to be done responsibly to protect marine ecosystems and ensure long-term food security.
• Ocean Cleanup: Technologies to remove plastic and other pollutants from the oceans would be essential for maintaining ocean health.
• Deep-Sea Exploration: Exploring and utilizing resources from the deep sea would need to be done with minimal environmental impact.

6. Global Infrastructure:

• Energy Grids: Smart grids powered by renewable energy sources would need to be highly efficient and resilient.
• Communication Networks: Sustainable technologies would be needed to maintain and expand global communication networks with minimal environmental impact.
• Water Management Systems: Advanced technologies for water purification, conservation, and distribution would be crucial for ensuring access to clean water.

In essence, sustainable technology in 3320 would be needed everywhere to support a thriving and equitable society while preserving the health of the planet. It would be deeply integrated into the built environment, transportation systems, food production, resource management, and even space exploration.

Do you want to explore how sustainable technology might be applied in a specific location or sector? I can provide more details and examples!

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

That’s a crucial question! It’s not just about what sustainable technology is, but how it’s implemented and integrated into society. Here’s how sustainable technology might be “required” (in the sense of being essential and integrated) in 3320:

1. Policy and Regulation:

• Global Agreements: International treaties and agreements would likely enforce sustainability standards for resource use, emissions, and environmental protection.
• Incentives and Disincentives: Governments might use taxes, subsidies, and regulations to encourage sustainable practices and discourage unsustainable ones.
• Extended Producer Responsibility: Companies could be held responsible for the entire lifecycle of their products, from design and production to disposal and recycling.

2. Infrastructure and Systems:

• Integrated Networks: Sustainable technologies would be seamlessly integrated into infrastructure systems, such as energy grids, transportation networks, and communication systems.
• Smart Technologies: AI and automation would optimize resource use and manage environmental impacts in real-time.
• Circular Economy Systems: Closed-loop systems for resource recovery and recycling would be built into production and consumption processes.

3. Education and Awareness:

• Sustainability Literacy: Education systems would likely emphasize sustainability principles and empower individuals to make informed choices.
• Public Awareness Campaigns: Ongoing communication efforts would reinforce the importance of sustainability and encourage responsible behavior.
• Community Engagement: Local initiatives and participatory approaches would involve citizens in developing and implementing sustainable solutions.

4. Technological Advancements:

• Innovation and Research: Continuous investment in research and development would drive innovation in sustainable technologies.
• Technology Transfer: Sharing knowledge and technologies across borders would accelerate the adoption of sustainable practices globally.
• Adaptive Technologies: Technologies would be designed to adapt to changing environmental conditions and evolving societal needs.

5. Societal Values and Ethics:

• Sustainability Ethos: A strong cultural emphasis on sustainability would shape individual and collective behavior.
• Environmental Stewardship: A sense of responsibility for protecting the environment would guide decision-making at all levels.
• Intergenerational Equity: A commitment to ensuring a healthy planet and a thriving society for future generations would be a core value.

In essence, sustainable technology in 3320 would be required through a combination of:

• Top-down approaches: Policies, regulations, and infrastructure development.
• Bottom-up approaches: Education, awareness, and community engagement.
• Technological advancements: Innovation, research, and development.
• Societal values: A shared commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship.

It’s important to remember that this is a hypothetical scenario. The actual implementation of sustainable technology in the future will depend on the choices we make today. By prioritizing sustainability now, we can increase the chances of a positive future for all.

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

It’s impossible to provide a real case study of sustainable technology in 3320, as that’s far in the future. However, we can create a hypothetical case study to illustrate how such technologies might function and their impact. This allows us to explore the possibilities and challenges.

Hypothetical Case Study: The Revitalization of the Amazon Rainforest in 3320

Context: By 3320, despite centuries of efforts, parts of the Amazon rainforest are still recovering from past deforestation and climate change impacts. Traditional methods of reforestation have proven slow and insufficient.

Sustainable Technology Solution: A multi-pronged approach utilizing several advanced technologies is implemented:

1. Bio-Integrated Drones: Swarms of small, autonomous drones, constructed from biodegradable materials, are deployed. These drones are pre-programmed with specific seed mixes tailored to different areas of the rainforest. They analyze soil conditions, topography, and existing vegetation using advanced sensors. The drones then precisely plant the seeds, along with mycorrhizal fungi and other beneficial microorganisms, directly into the soil. They also distribute slow-release nutrient packets made from recycled agricultural waste.
2. Atmospheric Carbon Capture and Conversion: Mobile carbon capture units, powered by advanced fusion energy, are strategically placed near deforested areas. These units capture atmospheric CO2 and convert it into usable materials, such as biochar (a soil amendment) and building materials. The biochar is then used to enrich the soil in reforestation areas, further enhancing growth.
3. Advanced Hydrological Management: A network of smart sensors and AI-controlled irrigation systems manages water resources within the rainforest. These systems monitor soil moisture levels, rainfall patterns, and river flows, ensuring that newly planted areas receive optimal hydration while minimizing water waste. They can even induce localized cloud formation through targeted atmospheric manipulation, if needed.
4. Genetic Enhancement and Adaptation: Scientists use advanced biotechnology to develop tree species that are more resilient to drought, disease, and changing climate conditions. These enhanced trees are then integrated into the reforestation efforts, increasing the long-term success of the project.
5. Ecosystem Monitoring and Feedback: A comprehensive network of sensors and AI systems continuously monitors the health and progress of the rainforest ecosystem. This data is used to optimize the reforestation strategies in real-time, adapting to changing conditions and addressing any emerging challenges.

Impact:

• Accelerated Reforestation: The combined use of these technologies dramatically accelerates the pace of rainforest regeneration, far exceeding the capabilities of traditional methods.
• Enhanced Biodiversity: The targeted seed mixes and habitat restoration efforts promote the return of diverse plant and animal species to the rainforest.
• Carbon Sequestration: The regrown forest acts as a significant carbon sink, helping to mitigate climate change.
• Economic Benefits: Sustainable harvesting of forest products, ecotourism, and the development of new bio-based materials create economic opportunities for local communities.
• Ecosystem Resilience: The revitalized rainforest is more resilient to climate change impacts, such as droughts and fires.

Challenges:

• Technological Complexity: Integrating these advanced technologies requires significant research, development, and coordination.
• Ethical Considerations: The use of biotechnology and environmental manipulation raises ethical questions that need careful consideration.
• Long-Term Maintenance: Ensuring the long-term health and sustainability of the restored rainforest requires ongoing monitoring and management.

This hypothetical case study illustrates how sustainable technology in 3320 could be used to address complex environmental challenges. It highlights the potential benefits of these technologies, as well as the importance of careful planning, ethical considerations, and long-term management.

COURTESY : Carnegie India

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3320: A Vision for a Thriving Future

Abstract:

This white paper explores the potential landscape of sustainable technology in the year 3320. Building upon current trends and extrapolating future advancements, it envisions a world where technology is deeply integrated with ecological principles, fostering a harmonious relationship between humanity and the planet. The paper examines key technological domains, their potential impact, and the crucial considerations for ethical development and implementation.

1. Introduction:

The imperative for sustainable technology arises from the recognition that current practices are unsustainable. Resource depletion, climate change, and environmental degradation necessitate a fundamental shift in how we interact with the planet. This paper posits that by 3320, sustainable technology will not be a niche area but rather the foundation upon which all technological development rests.

2. Core Principles of Sustainable Technology in 3320:

• Biocentric Design: Technology mimics and integrates with natural systems, prioritizing ecological harmony.
• Closed-Loop Systems: Resource use is minimized through advanced recycling, reuse, and material transformation.
• Resilience and Adaptability: Technologies are designed to withstand environmental changes and adapt to evolving needs.
• Decentralization and Localization: Resource production and distribution are localized to minimize transportation needs and empower communities.
• Ethical and Equitable Access: Sustainable technologies are accessible to all, promoting social justice and environmental equity.

3. Key Technological Domains:

3.1 Energy:

• Fusion Power: Safe, clean, and abundant fusion energy dominates, powering civilization without greenhouse gas emissions.
• Space-Based Solar: Large-scale solar arrays in orbit capture sunlight unimpeded by the atmosphere, providing a continuous energy supply.
• Advanced Geothermal: Deep-earth geothermal energy taps into virtually limitless reserves, providing baseload power.
• Smart Grids: AI-powered grids optimize energy distribution and minimize waste.

3.2 Materials:

• Bio-Integrated Materials: Materials grown or engineered to seamlessly integrate with living systems, used in construction, medicine, and manufacturing.
• Adaptive Materials: Materials that change properties on demand (shape, color, strength) for dynamic applications.
• Self-Healing Materials: Materials that automatically repair damage, extending lifespan and reducing waste.
• Metamaterials: Engineered materials with properties not found in nature, enabling breakthroughs in various fields.

3.3 Environment:

• Global Climate Regulation: Technologies to actively manage climate systems, including carbon capture, solar radiation management, and weather modification.
• Ecosystem Restoration: Advanced techniques to revitalize damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs.
• Pollution Remediation: Nanotechnology and biotechnology to break down pollutants and restore environmental health.
• Biodiversity Preservation: Technologies to monitor, protect, and enhance biodiversity, including genetic engineering and habitat restoration.

3.4 Food and Agriculture:

• Personalized Nutrition: Food tailored to individual needs, grown in highly efficient vertical farms or synthesized using advanced biotechnology.
• Sustainable Aquaculture: Ocean farming that is both productive and environmentally responsible, with minimal impact on marine ecosystems.
• Cellular Agriculture: Large-scale production of meat and other animal products from cell cultures, reducing land use and environmental impact.
• Precision Agriculture: Highly automated systems that optimize resource use in agriculture, including water, nutrients, and pesticides.

3.5 Information and Communication:

• Ubiquitous Computing: Computing power seamlessly integrated into the environment, providing access to information and services anytime, anywhere.
• Neural Interfaces: Brain-computer interfaces that enhance human capabilities and communication.
• Decentralized Networks: Secure and resilient communication networks that empower individuals and communities.

4. Societal Implications:

• Economic Transformation: A shift towards a circular economy and sustainable industries creates new jobs and economic opportunities.
• Social Equity: Sustainable technologies can help address inequalities in access to resources and opportunities.
• Environmental Justice: Communities disproportionately affected by environmental problems benefit from sustainable solutions.
• Quality of Life: Access to clean energy, healthy food, and a thriving environment enhances quality of life for all.

5. Challenges and Considerations:

• Ethical Development: Careful consideration of the ethical implications of advanced technologies is crucial.
• Social Impact: The transition to a sustainable future requires careful management of social and economic changes.
• Technological Risks: Potential unintended consequences of new technologies must be carefully assessed and mitigated.
• Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges like climate change and resource depletion requires international collaboration.

6. Conclusion:

The vision of sustainable technology in 3320 offers a pathway to a thriving future for humanity and the planet. By embracing innovation, prioritizing ethical considerations, and fostering global cooperation, we can create a world where technology and nature coexist in harmony. However, the realization of this vision depends on the choices we make today. We must act now to develop and implement sustainable technologies that will ensure a healthy planet and a prosperous future for generations to come.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

You’re asking about the practical side of sustainable tech in 3320! Here are some potential industrial applications, keeping in mind this is imaginative speculation:

1. Manufacturing:

• Bio-factories: Imagine factories that “grow” materials using bio-integrated processes. This could mean vats of microorganisms producing plastics, fabrics, or even building materials. This would minimize waste and reliance on fossil fuels.
• Adaptive Manufacturing: Factories could use materials that change properties on demand. This allows for highly flexible production lines, where the same machines can create a wide variety of products by simply altering the materials’ characteristics.
• Personalized Production: 3D printing and other additive manufacturing technologies could be highly advanced, allowing for on-demand creation of customized products. This would reduce waste from overproduction and enable highly specialized goods.

2. Resource Extraction:

• Sustainable Mining: Mining of resources from asteroids or the deep sea would need to be done with minimal environmental impact. This could involve robotic systems, in-situ resource processing, and careful ecosystem management to avoid long-term damage.
• Closed-Loop Resource Use: Industries would operate on a circular economy model. Materials would be designed for disassembly and reuse, with advanced recycling technologies to recover valuable resources from waste streams.
• Atmospheric Resource Capture: Technologies to extract valuable elements from the atmosphere, such as rare earth minerals or even carbon, could become commonplace.

3. Construction:

• Bio-Integrated Buildings: Buildings could be “grown” using bio-integrated materials, such as self-healing concrete or timber engineered to have specific properties. This would reduce reliance on traditional construction materials and minimize waste.
• Adaptive Structures: Buildings could be designed to adapt to changing environmental conditions, such as adjusting their shape to optimize energy use or withstand extreme weather events.
• Modular Construction: Buildings could be constructed from modular components that can be easily reconfigured or reused, allowing for flexible and adaptable infrastructure.

4. Energy Production:

• Fusion Power Plants: Fusion reactors would be the primary source of energy for industry, providing clean and abundant power for manufacturing, transportation, and other processes.
• Space-Based Solar Infrastructure: Maintaining and expanding space-based solar arrays would be a major industry, requiring advanced robotics, materials science, and engineering expertise.
• Smart Energy Grids: Managing and optimizing complex energy grids powered by diverse renewable sources would be a critical industrial function, relying on AI and real-time data analysis.

5. Transportation:

• Hyperloop Manufacturing: Building and maintaining hyperloop networks would be a major industrial undertaking, requiring advanced materials, engineering, and automation technologies.
• Personal Aerial Vehicle Production: Manufacturing and servicing personal aerial vehicles would be a growing industry, with a focus on safety, efficiency, and sustainability.
• Electric Vehicle Infrastructure: Building and maintaining a widespread network of charging stations powered by renewable energy would be essential for supporting electric transportation.

6. Agriculture and Food Production:

• Vertical Farming Systems: Designing, building, and operating large-scale vertical farms in urban areas would be a significant industry, providing fresh produce with minimal land use and environmental impact.
• Cellular Agriculture Facilities: Producing meat and other animal products from cell cultures would require specialized facilities and expertise in biotechnology and biomanufacturing.
• Precision Agriculture Technology: Developing and deploying advanced sensors, AI systems, and robotics for precision agriculture would be crucial for optimizing food production and minimizing resource use.

Important Considerations:

• Automation and AI: Many of these industries would likely rely heavily on automation and AI, requiring a skilled workforce capable of designing, operating, and maintaining these advanced systems.
• Sustainability Focus: All industrial activities would need to be carefully managed to minimize environmental impact, conserve resources, and ensure long-term sustainability.
• Ethical Considerations: The development and application of these technologies would need to be guided by strong ethical principles, ensuring equitable access and responsible use.

These are just a few examples of how sustainable technology might be applied in industry in 3320. The actual landscape will depend on future advancements and the choices we make today. By prioritizing sustainability now, we can increase the chances of a future where technology serves both humanity and the planet.

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3320 ?

It’s exciting to think about the research and development (R&D) that might lead to the sustainable technologies of 3320! Here’s a breakdown of potential areas of focus, keeping in mind this is highly speculative:

1. Fundamental Science:

• Advanced Physics: Research into areas like quantum physics, unified field theory, and alternative dimensions could unlock new energy sources, material properties, and transportation methods.
• Biotechnology and Synthetic Biology: Exploring the intricacies of living systems could lead to breakthroughs in bio-integrated materials, personalized medicine, and enhanced agricultural practices.
• Cognitive Science and Neuroscience: Understanding consciousness and intelligence could lead to advancements in artificial intelligence, brain-computer interfaces, and human-computer interaction.

2. Energy Technologies:

• Fusion Energy: Continued research into fusion reactor design, plasma physics, and advanced materials could lead to the development of highly efficient and safe fusion power plants.
• Space-Based Solar: Developing advanced robotics, materials science, and energy transmission technologies could make space-based solar power a viable and cost-effective energy source.
• Geothermal Energy: Research into deep-earth geothermal energy extraction, advanced drilling techniques, and enhanced geothermal systems could tap into vast and underutilized energy reserves.

3. Materials Science:

• Bio-Integrated Materials: Developing materials that can be grown or engineered to seamlessly integrate with living systems could revolutionize construction, manufacturing, and medicine.
• Adaptive Materials: Research into materials that can change properties on demand could lead to breakthroughs in fields like robotics, aerospace, and consumer goods.
• Self-Healing Materials: Developing materials that can automatically repair damage could extend the lifespan of products and infrastructure, reducing waste and maintenance costs.

4. Environmental Technologies:

• Climate Engineering: Research into safe and effective methods for managing climate systems, such as carbon capture, solar radiation management, and weather modification, could be crucial for mitigating climate change.
• Ecosystem Restoration: Developing advanced techniques for revitalizing damaged ecosystems, including forests, oceans, and coral reefs, could help preserve biodiversity and restore ecological balance.
• Pollution Remediation: Research into nanotechnology and biotechnology for breaking down pollutants and restoring environmental health could lead to innovative solutions for cleaning up contaminated sites and preventing future pollution.

5. Food and Agriculture:

• Cellular Agriculture: Continued research into cell culturing techniques, bioreactor design, and tissue engineering could make lab-grown meat and other animal products a sustainable and affordable food source.
• Precision Agriculture: Developing advanced sensors, AI systems, and robotics for precision agriculture could optimize resource use in farming, increasing yields while minimizing environmental impact.
• Personalized Nutrition: Research into genomics, metabolomics, and other fields could lead to the development of personalized food plans and customized nutrient delivery systems.

6. Information and Communication Technologies:

• Quantum Computing: Research into quantum computing could revolutionize fields like artificial intelligence, materials science, and cryptography, leading to breakthroughs in various areas of sustainable technology.
• Neural Interfaces: Developing advanced brain-computer interfaces could enhance human capabilities, improve communication, and enable new forms of human-computer interaction.
• Decentralized Networks: Research into secure and resilient communication networks could empower individuals and communities, fostering greater participation in decision-making and resource management.

7. Social Sciences and Ethics:

• Sustainability Studies: Research into the social, economic, and political dimensions of sustainability could help guide the development and implementation of sustainable technologies in an equitable and responsible manner.
• Environmental Ethics: Exploring the ethical implications of advanced technologies, such as genetic engineering and climate engineering, could help ensure that these technologies are used in a way that benefits humanity and the planet.
• Futures Studies: Analyzing long-term trends and potential scenarios could help anticipate the challenges and opportunities of the future, guiding research and development efforts in sustainable technology.

Important Considerations:

• Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Addressing complex challenges like climate change and resource depletion requires collaboration across multiple disciplines, including science, engineering, social sciences, and the humanities.
• Open Access and Knowledge Sharing: Sharing research findings and technological advancements openly can accelerate the development and diffusion of sustainable technologies globally.
• Ethical Guidelines and Regulations: Establishing clear ethical guidelines and regulations for the development and use of advanced technologies is crucial for ensuring that these technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.

By investing in research and development across these areas, we can increase the chances of creating a future where sustainable technology is not just a vision but a reality.

COURTESY : RBC

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.