Sustainable Technology of 3340

79 / 100

Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

It appears you’re asking about the sustainable technology features of the Dell Latitude 3340 laptop. Here’s a breakdown of what makes this laptop a more environmentally conscious choice:

Recycled Materials:

The Latitude 3340 incorporates recycled plastics in various components:
50% recycled plastics in the bezel, battery housing, and AC adapter exterior.
30% recycled plastics in the lids and bottom door.

Eco-Friendly Packaging:

Dell has revamped its packaging to be 100% recycled or renewable.
The packaging is also entirely recyclable, further minimizing environmental impact.

Energy Efficiency:

The Latitude 3340 offers features like Express Charge, which optimizes battery usage and charging times, potentially reducing energy consumption.
Dell also focuses on overall energy efficiency in its laptop designs.

Recycling Programs:

Dell provides recycling services for its products, encouraging responsible disposal and reuse of materials.

Ecolabels:

The Latitude 3340 meets eco-labeling standards, ensuring transparency and helping consumers make informed decisions.

Additional Sustainability Initiatives:

Dell is committed to reducing its overall environmental footprint through various initiatives, including:
Sustainable manufacturing processes
Responsible sourcing of materials
Carbon emissions reduction goals

By focusing on recycled materials, efficient energy use, and responsible recycling, the Dell Latitude 3340 aims to minimize its impact on the environment.

You stopped this response

What is Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

You’re asking about the sustainable technology features of the Dell Latitude 3340. Here’s a breakdown:

Recycled Materials: The laptop incorporates recycled plastics in key components:
- 50% recycled plastics in the bezel, battery housing, and AC adapter exterior.
- 30% recycled plastics in the lids and bottom door.
Eco-Friendly Packaging: Dell has redesigned its packaging to be 100% recycled or renewable. The packaging is also entirely recyclable.
Energy Efficiency: The Latitude 3340 offers features like Express Charge, which optimizes battery usage and charging times, potentially reducing energy consumption. Dell also focuses on overall energy efficiency in its laptop designs.
Recycling Programs: Dell provides recycling services for its products, encouraging responsible disposal and reuse of materials.
Ecolabels: The Latitude 3340 meets eco-labeling standards, ensuring transparency and helping consumers make informed decisions.
Additional Sustainability Initiatives: Dell is committed to reducing its overall environmental footprint through various initiatives, including:
- Sustainable manufacturing processes
- Responsible sourcing of materials
- Carbon emissions reduction goals

By focusing on recycled materials, efficient energy use, and responsible recycling, the Dell Latitude 3340 aims to minimize its impact on the environment.

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

The Dell Latitude 3340’s sustainable technology features are beneficial for a wide range of users and organizations, including:

Environmentally Conscious Consumers: Individuals who prioritize sustainability and want to reduce their environmental impact will find the Latitude 3340’s use of recycled materials, eco-friendly packaging, and energy-efficient design appealing.
Businesses with Sustainability Goals: Companies that have set targets for reducing their carbon footprint and promoting environmental responsibility can use the Latitude 3340 to help achieve those goals.
Organizations Seeking Eco-Labels and Certifications: The laptop’s compliance with eco-labeling standards can be important for organizations that need to meet specific environmental certifications or requirements.
Educational Institutions: Schools and universities that are increasingly focused on sustainability can choose the Latitude 3340 for its eco-friendly features.
Government Agencies: Government bodies often have procurement policies that favor environmentally friendly products, making the Latitude 3340 a suitable option.
IT Departments: IT professionals can recommend the Latitude 3340 to their organizations as a sustainable choice that still offers the performance and features needed for business use.

Essentially, anyone who wants a laptop that is less harmful to the environment can benefit from the sustainable technology features of the Dell Latitude 3340.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

The need for sustainable technology like that found in the Dell Latitude 3340 is becoming increasingly urgent. Here’s when it’s most required:

Now: The environmental challenges we face are pressing. Climate change, resource depletion, and pollution demand immediate action. Choosing sustainable technology is a crucial step in mitigating these issues.
When making purchasing decisions: Every time an organization or individual needs to buy new laptops, considering sustainability should be a top priority. Opting for models like the Latitude 3340 helps drive demand for eco-friendly products and encourages manufacturers to adopt more sustainable practices.
For organizations with environmental goals: Businesses, schools, and government agencies with sustainability targets need to incorporate sustainable technology into their operations. The Latitude 3340 can help them meet those goals and demonstrate their commitment to environmental responsibility.
In the face of increasing environmental regulations: As governments implement stricter environmental regulations, organizations will need to ensure their technology choices comply. The Latitude 3340’s eco-friendly features can help with this.
To reduce long-term costs: Sustainable technology often comes with energy-efficient features that can lead to cost savings over time. Reduced energy consumption and responsible recycling can lower operational expenses.
To appeal to environmentally conscious consumers: More and more consumers are making purchasing decisions based on a company’s environmental and social responsibility. Using sustainable technology can enhance a brand’s image and attract eco-conscious customers.
To create a more sustainable future: Ultimately, the need for sustainable technology is about building a better future for generations to come. By adopting eco-friendly practices and choosing sustainable products, we can contribute to a healthier planet and a more sustainable society.

In short, the time for sustainable technology is always, and the need is now more critical than ever.

COURTESY :RBC

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

The need for sustainable technology like that in the Dell Latitude 3340 exists in a wide range of places and situations:

In all sectors:

Businesses of all sizes: From small startups to large corporations, every company can benefit from adopting sustainable technology.
Educational institutions: Schools, universities, and research centers have a responsibility to promote sustainability and educate future generations.
Government agencies: Public sector organizations at all levels (local, regional, national) should prioritize sustainable procurement and operations.
Healthcare organizations: Hospitals and clinics can reduce their environmental impact by choosing sustainable technology.
Non-profit organizations: Charities and NGOs can align their technology choices with their mission of social and environmental responsibility.

In various settings:

Offices: Sustainable laptops can be used by employees in all departments, from administrative staff to executives.
Remote work: As more people work from home, it’s important to use sustainable technology in home offices as well.
Classrooms: Students and teachers can use sustainable laptops for learning and teaching.
Labs and research facilities: Scientists and researchers can use sustainable technology for data analysis and experimentation.
Public spaces: Libraries, community centers, and other public spaces can offer sustainable technology for public use.

In specific situations:

Technology refresh cycles: When organizations upgrade their laptops, they should choose sustainable models to replace older, less efficient devices.
New projects and initiatives: When starting a new project, consider the environmental impact of the technology used and choose sustainable options.
Events and conferences: Organizers can use sustainable technology for presentations, registration, and other event-related tasks.

Essentially, the need for sustainable technology exists wherever technology is used. By making conscious choices to adopt eco-friendly devices like the Dell Latitude 3340, organizations and individuals can contribute to a more sustainable future.

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

You’re asking how the Dell Latitude 3340 incorporates sustainable technology. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Materials:

Recycled Plastics: The laptop uses recycled plastics in its construction. This reduces the need for virgin plastic and helps divert plastic waste from landfills. Specifically:
- 50% recycled plastics in the bezel, battery housing, and AC adapter exterior.
- 30% recycled plastics in the lids and bottom door.

2. Packaging:

Eco-Friendly Packaging: Dell has redesigned its packaging to be 100% recycled or renewable. This reduces the environmental impact of packaging materials and makes it easier for consumers to recycle the packaging.

3. Energy Efficiency:

Optimized Power Consumption: The Latitude 3340 is designed with energy efficiency in mind. This can include features like:
- Energy-efficient processors and components
- Features like Express Charge, which optimizes battery usage and charging times.

4. Responsible Recycling:

Dell’s Recycling Programs: Dell offers recycling services for its products. This encourages responsible disposal and helps ensure that materials are recovered and reused instead of ending up in landfills.

5. Eco-Labels and Certifications:

Meeting Industry Standards: The Latitude 3340 likely meets various eco-labeling standards, such as ENERGY STAR or EPEAT. These certifications provide independent verification of the laptop’s environmental performance.

6. Dell’s Overall Sustainability Initiatives:

Beyond the Product: Dell has broader sustainability goals and initiatives that influence the design and manufacturing of its products, including:
- Sustainable manufacturing processes
- Responsible sourcing of materials
- Carbon emissions reduction goals

In summary, the Dell Latitude 3340 incorporates sustainable technology through its use of recycled materials, eco-friendly packaging, energy-efficient design, and support for responsible recycling. These features help to reduce the laptop’s environmental impact throughout its lifecycle.

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

A case study focusing specifically on the sustainable technology of the Dell Latitude 3340 would likely examine the following aspects:

1. Recycled Materials:

Sourcing and Composition: A case study would delve into the specifics of the recycled plastics used. Where do they come from? What types of plastics are used (e.g., post-consumer recycled, ocean-bound plastic)? What percentage of the overall plastic in the laptop is recycled? Are there any challenges in sourcing or using these recycled materials?
Impact Assessment: The study would analyze the environmental impact of using recycled plastics compared to virgin plastics. This could include metrics like reduced plastic waste, lower energy consumption in manufacturing, and decreased reliance on fossil fuels.

2. Eco-Friendly Packaging:

Materials and Design: The case study would detail the materials used in the packaging (e.g., recycled cardboard, molded fiber). It would examine the design of the packaging, focusing on its recyclability and minimizing waste.
Comparison and Improvement: The study might compare Dell’s packaging to industry standards or previous packaging designs. It could also explore areas for further improvement, such as eliminating plastic entirely or using even higher percentages of recycled content.

3. Energy Efficiency:

Hardware and Software Optimization: A key part of the case study would be the laptop’s energy-efficient hardware (e.g., processors, displays) and software features (e.g., power management settings). It would analyze the laptop’s energy consumption under different usage scenarios.
Benchmarking and Standards: The study would likely benchmark the Latitude 3340’s energy efficiency against similar laptops and relevant industry standards (e.g., ENERGY STAR). It would assess the potential energy savings over the laptop’s lifespan.

4. End-of-Life Management:

Recycling Programs: The case study would examine Dell’s recycling programs in detail. How easy is it for consumers and businesses to recycle the laptop? What happens to the materials that are recovered? How effective are these programs at diverting waste from landfills?
Design for Disassembly: The study might also consider whether the laptop is designed for easy disassembly, which can facilitate recycling and component reuse.

5. Overall Environmental Impact:

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Ideally, the case study would include a life cycle assessment of the Latitude 3340. This would analyze the environmental impact of the laptop from raw material extraction to manufacturing, transportation, use, and end-of-life.
Carbon Footprint: The LCA would likely include an estimate of the laptop’s carbon footprint, considering greenhouse gas emissions throughout its life cycle.

6. Social and Economic Considerations:

Ethical Sourcing: The case study could also explore Dell’s efforts to ensure ethical sourcing of materials used in the laptop, including responsible mining practices and fair labor conditions.
Cost-Benefit Analysis: The study might analyze the costs and benefits of the sustainable technology features. Are there any trade-offs between environmental performance and cost?

7. Future Directions:

Innovation and Improvement: The case study could conclude by looking at future directions for sustainable technology in laptops. What are the opportunities for further innovation in materials, energy efficiency, and end-of-life management?

By examining these aspects, a case study on the Dell Latitude 3340’s sustainable technology could provide valuable insights into the benefits and challenges of developing and implementing eco-friendly IT products. It could also serve as a model for other manufacturers looking to improve the sustainability of their products.

COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

White Paper: The Dell Latitude 3340: A Case Study in Sustainable Technology

Abstract:

This white paper examines the sustainable technology integrated into the Dell Latitude 3340 laptop, highlighting its contributions to environmental responsibility. In an era of increasing environmental awareness, businesses and consumers are seeking technology solutions that minimize their impact. The Latitude 3340 demonstrates Dell’s commitment to sustainability through its use of recycled materials, eco-friendly packaging, energy-efficient design, and responsible recycling programs. This paper explores these key features and their positive environmental impact, showcasing the 3340 as a viable option for organizations and individuals prioritizing sustainability.

1. Introduction:

The growing demand for electronic devices presents a significant environmental challenge. Manufacturing, use, and disposal of these devices contribute to resource depletion, pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions. Dell recognizes this challenge and has integrated sustainable practices into the design and production of the Latitude 3340. This white paper details the specific sustainable technology features of this laptop, demonstrating its role in promoting a more environmentally conscious approach to technology.

2. Recycled Materials: Reducing Reliance on Virgin Resources:

The Latitude 3340 incorporates recycled plastics in key components, significantly reducing the need for virgin plastic and diverting waste from landfills. Specifically:

50% recycled plastics: Utilized in the bezel, battery housing, and AC adapter exterior.
30% recycled plastics: Incorporated into the lids and bottom door.

This use of recycled materials lowers the environmental footprint associated with plastic production, conserving resources and minimizing pollution. Further research could explore the specific sources of the recycled plastics and the processes used to ensure their quality and suitability for use in the laptop.

3. Eco-Friendly Packaging: Minimizing Waste and Promoting Recyclability:

Dell has redesigned its packaging to be 100% recycled or renewable, further demonstrating its commitment to sustainability. This packaging is also entirely recyclable, encouraging responsible disposal and minimizing waste. A comparative analysis of Dell’s packaging approach against industry standards could highlight its leadership in this area.

4. Energy Efficiency: Lowering Energy Consumption and Reducing Costs:

The Latitude 3340 is designed with energy efficiency in mind. Features like Express Charge optimize battery usage and charging times, potentially reducing energy consumption and extending battery lifespan. A detailed analysis of the laptop’s power consumption under various usage scenarios, compared to similar models, would provide quantifiable data on its energy-saving potential. Furthermore, exploring the specific energy-efficient components and technologies used in the laptop would add further depth to this analysis.

5. Responsible Recycling: Extending Product Lifespan and Recovering Resources:

Dell’s commitment to sustainability extends to the end-of-life management of its products. Dell offers recycling services, encouraging responsible disposal and ensuring that valuable materials are recovered and reused. An examination of the effectiveness of these recycling programs, including the collection and processing methods, would provide insights into their impact on resource recovery and waste reduction. Furthermore, exploring the “design for disassembly” aspects of the laptop would highlight its recyclability.

6. Dell’s Broader Sustainability Initiatives:

The Latitude 3340 is a product of Dell’s broader commitment to sustainability. This includes initiatives such as sustainable manufacturing processes, responsible sourcing of materials, and ambitious carbon emissions reduction goals. Connecting the 3340’s sustainable features to these overarching initiatives would provide a more holistic view of Dell’s sustainability efforts.

7. Conclusion:

The Dell Latitude 3340 exemplifies how sustainable technology can be integrated into modern electronic devices. Through its use of recycled materials, eco-friendly packaging, energy-efficient design, and support for responsible recycling, the 3340 minimizes its environmental impact throughout its lifecycle. This laptop serves as a compelling case study for other manufacturers and demonstrates the growing viability of sustainable technology solutions. Further research and analysis, as suggested throughout this paper, could provide even more detailed insights into the environmental benefits of the Latitude 3340 and inform future developments in sustainable technology.

Inudstrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

While the Dell Latitude 3340 itself is a laptop, its sustainable technology features have broader implications and can be applied in various industrial contexts:

1. Promoting Sustainable Procurement Practices:

Setting Standards: The 3340’s sustainability features can serve as a benchmark for industries looking to adopt greener procurement policies. Companies can use it as an example when specifying requirements for laptops and other electronic devices, pushing manufacturers to prioritize sustainability.
Incentivizing Innovation: By choosing laptops like the 3340, industries can drive demand for sustainable technology, encouraging further innovation and development in this area.

2. Reducing Environmental Footprint in Industrial Operations:

Energy Efficiency in Offices: In office-based industries, deploying energy-efficient laptops like the 3340 can contribute to significant energy savings across the organization, reducing operational costs and carbon emissions.
Sustainable IT Infrastructure: Industries relying heavily on IT infrastructure can incorporate sustainable laptops as part of a broader strategy to reduce the environmental impact of their technology.

3. Supporting Circular Economy Models:

Responsible Recycling: Industries can partner with Dell’s recycling programs to ensure proper disposal and recovery of materials from laptops like the 3340 at the end of their lifecycle, contributing to a circular economy model for electronics.
Extending Product Lifespan: The durability and repairability of the 3340, combined with Dell’s support services, can help extend the lifespan of the laptops, reducing the need for frequent replacements and minimizing e-waste.

4. Enhancing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Initiatives:

Demonstrating Commitment: Industries can use the 3340 as a tangible example of their commitment to sustainability in their CSR reports and initiatives.
Stakeholder Engagement: Choosing sustainable technology can enhance a company’s reputation among environmentally conscious consumers, investors, and employees.

5. Inspiring Sustainable Practices in Manufacturing:

Material Selection: The 3340’s use of recycled plastics can inspire manufacturers in other industries to explore similar approaches, reducing their reliance on virgin materials and minimizing plastic waste.
Packaging Innovation: Dell’s eco-friendly packaging can encourage other companies to adopt more sustainable packaging solutions, reducing waste and promoting recyclability.

Examples of Industrial Applications:

Manufacturing: Companies can equip their office staff and field technicians with sustainable laptops like the 3340, reducing the environmental footprint of their operations.
Technology: IT companies can promote the use of sustainable laptops among their employees and clients, contributing to a greener technology sector.
Finance: Banks and financial institutions can incorporate sustainable laptops into their IT infrastructure, aligning with their growing focus on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors.
Healthcare: Hospitals and clinics can use sustainable laptops for administrative tasks and patient care, reducing their environmental impact while maintaining high standards of performance.

By adopting and promoting sustainable technology like that found in the Dell Latitude 3340, industries can contribute to a more environmentally responsible and sustainable future.

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3340 ?

The Dell Latitude 3340 incorporates existing sustainable technologies, but further research and development could enhance its sustainability and that of future laptops. Here are some potential areas:

1. Advanced Materials Research:

Bioplastics: Explore the use of bioplastics derived from renewable resources (e.g., corn, sugarcane) to replace traditional plastics in laptop components. This would further reduce reliance on fossil fuels and decrease the environmental impact of plastic production.
Recycled and Upcycled Materials: Investigate new methods for incorporating a wider range of recycled materials into laptop construction, including metals, glass, and even textiles. Explore upcycling technologies to transform waste materials into high-value components for laptops.
Sustainable Composites: Research and develop new composite materials made from recycled or renewable resources that offer the same durability and performance as traditional composites while being more environmentally friendly.

2. Energy Efficiency Enhancements:

Next-Generation Processors: Collaborate with processor manufacturers to develop even more energy-efficient CPUs and GPUs specifically designed for laptops. This could involve architectural improvements, new materials, and advanced manufacturing processes.
Advanced Display Technologies: Research and implement more energy-efficient display technologies, such as OLED or microLED, which consume less power than traditional LCDs while maintaining image quality.
Smart Power Management: Develop more sophisticated power management software that uses AI and machine learning to optimize energy consumption based on user behavior and application needs.

3. Design for Disassembly and Recyclability:

Modular Design: Design laptops with modular components that can be easily replaced and upgraded, extending the product lifespan and facilitating recycling.
Standardized Connectors: Promote the use of standardized connectors and interfaces to make it easier to repair and upgrade laptops, reducing the need for complete replacements.
Recyclable Adhesives and Fasteners: Develop and implement recyclable adhesives and fasteners that can be easily disassembled during the recycling process, improving material recovery rates.

4. Closed-Loop Recycling Systems:

Partnerships and Infrastructure: Collaborate with recycling companies and establish closed-loop systems where materials recovered from recycled laptops are used to manufacture new ones, minimizing waste and resource depletion.
Material Recovery Technologies: Invest in research and development of advanced material recovery technologies that can efficiently separate and purify valuable materials from electronic waste, enabling their reuse in new products.

5. Life Cycle Assessment and Optimization:

Comprehensive LCA: Conduct thorough life cycle assessments of laptops to identify the most significant environmental impacts across their entire life cycle, from material extraction to end-of-life management.
Design for Environment (DFE): Use LCA findings to inform design decisions and optimize the environmental performance of laptops throughout their life cycle.

6. Sustainable Manufacturing Processes:

Renewable Energy: Transition to manufacturing processes powered by renewable energy sources to reduce the carbon footprint of laptop production.
Water Conservation: Implement water-efficient manufacturing processes to minimize water consumption and reduce water pollution.
Waste Reduction: Minimize waste generation during manufacturing through process optimization and material reuse.

7. Consumer Education and Engagement:

Sustainable Use Practices: Educate consumers about sustainable laptop use practices, such as optimizing power settings, extending battery life, and properly recycling old devices.
Transparency and Labeling: Provide clear and transparent information about the environmental performance of laptops through eco-labels and product declarations, empowering consumers to make informed choices.

By investing in these research and development areas, Dell and other laptop manufacturers can further improve the sustainability of their products and contribute to a more environmentally responsible technology industry.

COURTESY : Carnegie India

References

^ 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
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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
^ 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.
^ Jump up to:^a ^b ^c “Sustainability”. Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
^ “Sustainable Development”. UNESCO. 3 August 2015. Retrieved 20 January 2022.
^ 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.
^ Nelson, Anitra (31 January 2024). “Degrowth as a Concept and Practice: Introduction”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ Hardyment, Richard (2024). Measuring Good Business: Making Sense of Environmental, Social & Governance Data. Abingdon: Routledge. ISBN 9781032601199.
^ Bell, Simon; Morse, Stephen (2012). Sustainability Indicators: Measuring the Immeasurable?. Abington: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-84407-299-6.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ “University of Alberta: What is sustainability?” (PDF). mcgill.ca. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
^ Jump up to:^a ^b Halliday, Mike (21 November 2016). “How sustainable is sustainability?”. Oxford College of Procurement and Supply. Retrieved 12 July 2022.
^ Harper, Douglas. “sustain”. Online Etymology Dictionary.
^ Onions, Charles, T. (ed) (1964). The Shorter Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 2095.
^ “Sustainability Theories”. World Ocean Review. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
^ 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.
^ “Hans Carl von Carlowitz and Sustainability”. Environment and Society Portal. Retrieved 20 June 2019.
^ Dresden, SLUB. “Sylvicultura Oeconomica, Oder Haußwirthliche Nachricht und Naturmäßige Anweisung Zur Wilden Baum-Zucht”. digital.slub-dresden.de (in German). Retrieved 28 March 2022.
^ 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.
^ Basler, Ernst (1972). Strategy of Progress: Environmental Pollution, Habitat Scarcity and Future Research (originally, Strategie des Fortschritts: Umweltbelastung Lebensraumverknappung and Zukunftsforshung). BLV Publishing Company.
^ Gadgil, M.; Berkes, F. (1991). “Traditional Resource Management Systems”. Resource Management and Optimization. 8: 127–141.
^ “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.
^ 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.
^ 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
^ 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.
^ 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)
^ Scott Cato, M. (2009). Green Economics. London: Earthscan, pp. 36–37. ISBN 978-1-84407-571-3.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ Carson, Rachel (2002) [1st. Pub. Houghton Mifflin, 1962]. Silent Spring. Mariner Books. ISBN 978-0-618-24906-0.
^ 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.
^ 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
^ UNEP (2021). “Making Peace With Nature”. UNEP – UN Environment Programme. Retrieved 30 March 2022.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ Jump up to:^a ^b Wilhelm Krull, ed. (2000). Zukunftsstreit (in German). Weilerwist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. ISBN 3-934730-17-5. OCLC 52639118.
^ 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.
^ Daly, Herman E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development (PDF). Boston: Beacon Press. ISBN 0-8070-4708-2. OCLC 33946953.
^ 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)
^ “UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative”. UN Environment | UNDP-UN Environment Poverty-Environment Initiative. Retrieved 24 January 2022.
^ 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
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ “The Regional Institute – WACOSS Housing and Sustainable Communities Indicators Project”. www.regional.org.au. 2012. Retrieved 26 January 2022.
^ 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.
^ “Culture: Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development”. United Cities and Local Governments. Archived from the original on 3 October 2013.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ Bosselmann, Klaus (2017). The principle of sustainability: transforming law and governance (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-4724-8128-3. OCLC 951915998.
^ 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
^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: Routledge. ISBN 9781315765747.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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]}
^ Hak, T. et al. 2007. Sustainability Indicators, SCOPE 67. Island Press, London. [1] Archived 2011-12-18 at the Wayback Machine
^ 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.
^ “Sustainable Development visualized”. Sustainability concepts. Retrieved 24 March 2022.
^ 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.
^ “Ten years of nine planetary boundaries”. Stockholm Resilience Centre. November 2019. Retrieved 19 April 2020.
^ 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.
^ Ehrlich, P.R.; Holden, J.P. (1974). “Human Population and the global environment”. American Scientist. Vol. 62, no. 3. pp. 282–292.
^ 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
^ Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis (PDF). Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.
^ TEEB (2010), The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: Mainstreaming the Economics of Nature: A Synthesis of the Approach, Conclusions and Recommendations of TEEB
^ 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.
^ Groth, Christian (2014). Lecture notes in Economic Growth, (mimeo), Chapter 8: Choice of social discount rate. Copenhagen University.
^ UNEP, FAO (2020). UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. 48p.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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
^ European Environment Agency. (2019). Sustainability transitions: policy and practice. LU: Publications Office. doi:10.2800/641030. ISBN 9789294800862.
^ 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.
^ Kuenkel, Petra (2019). Stewarding Sustainability Transformations: An Emerging Theory and Practice of SDG Implementation. Cham: Springer. ISBN 978-3-030-03691-1. OCLC 1080190654.
^ 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
^ Smith, E. T. (23 January 2024). “Practising Commoning”. The Commons Social Change Library. Retrieved 23 February 2024.
^ 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.
^ Pigou, Arthur Cecil (1932). The Economics of Welfare (PDF) (4th ed.). London: Macmillan.
^ Jaeger, William K. (2005). Environmental economics for tree huggers and other skeptics. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7. OCLC 232157655.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ “The Nobel Prize: Women Who Changed the World”. thenobelprize.org. Retrieved 31 March 2022.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ 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.
^ “About Us”. Sustainable Business Institute. Archived from the original on 17 May 2009.
^ “About the WBCSD”. World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD). Archived from the original on 9 September 2007. Retrieved 1 April 2009.
^ “Supply Chain Sustainability | UN Global Compact”. www.unglobalcompact.org. Retrieved 4 May 2022.
^ “”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.
^ “The Statement — Interfaith Climate”. www.interfaithclimate.org. Retrieved 13 August 2022.
^ 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.
^ Gambino, Megan (15 March 2012). “Is it Too Late for Sustainable Development?”. Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved 12 January 2022.
^ 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.
^ Watson, Bruce (20 August 2016). “The troubling evolution of corporate greenwashing”. The Guardian. Archived from the original on 18 October 2016.
^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. www.bloomberg.ca. BNN Bloomberg. 18 August 2018.
^ “The Troubling Evolution Of Large Scale Corporate Greenwashing”. The Conversation. 18 August 2011.
^ 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.