Sustainable technology of 3930

Leave a Comment / Sustainable technology of 3930 / By
69 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

It’s difficult to predict the exact nature of sustainable technology in 3930, as it is over 1900 years in the future. However, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and potential future developments:

Possible Trends and Developments:

  • Advanced Energy Sources: By 3930, it’s likely that fossil fuels will be a distant memory. We might see widespread use of fusion power, advanced solar energy technologies (perhaps space-based), or other currently unknown energy sources.
  • Closed-Loop Systems: The concept of a circular economy will likely be highly advanced. Manufacturing processes could be entirely closed-loop, with materials being endlessly recycled and reused. Waste as we know it might not exist.
  • Biotechnology Integration: Biotechnology could be seamlessly integrated into everyday life. We might see bio-engineered materials, self-healing infrastructure, and even energy production through biological processes.
  • AI-Driven Optimization: Artificial intelligence will likely play a significant role in optimizing resource usage. Smart systems could manage energy grids, transportation networks, and even individual households to minimize waste and maximize efficiency.
  • Decentralized Production: Advanced manufacturing technologies like 3D printing could enable localized production of goods, reducing the need for long-distance transportation and centralized factories.
  • Space-Based Resources: By 3930, humanity might have established a significant presence in space. Access to resources from asteroids or other celestial bodies could further enhance sustainability efforts on Earth.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Unforeseen Technologies: It’s important to remember that technological progress is unpredictable. Entirely new technologies that we cannot even imagine today could emerge and revolutionize our approach to sustainability.
  • Ethical Considerations: As technologies advance, ethical considerations become increasingly important. Decisions about resource allocation, environmental management, and the use of powerful technologies will need careful thought and consideration.
  • Global Cooperation: Achieving true sustainability on a global scale will require unprecedented levels of cooperation and coordination among nations.

In Conclusion:

While we cannot know for sure what sustainable technology will look like in 3930, it’s safe to say that it will be far more advanced and integrated into our lives than it is today. By continuing to prioritize research, innovation, and ethical decision-making, we can create a future where technology and sustainability go hand in hand.

What is Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

Predicting the exact nature of sustainable technology in 3930 is a fascinating thought experiment. Here are some informed guesses based on current trends and potential future developments:

Possible Trends and Developments:

  • Advanced Energy Sources: Fossil fuels will likely be a distant memory. We might see widespread use of fusion power, advanced solar energy technologies (perhaps space-based), or other currently unknown energy sources.
  • Closed-Loop Systems: The concept of a circular economy will be highly advanced. Manufacturing processes could be entirely closed-loop, with materials being endlessly recycled and reused. Waste as we know it might not exist.
  • Biotechnology Integration: Biotechnology could be seamlessly integrated into everyday life. We might see bio-engineered materials, self-healing infrastructure, and even energy production through biological processes.
  • AI-Driven Optimization: Artificial intelligence will likely play a significant role in optimizing resource usage. Smart systems could manage energy grids, transportation networks, and even individual households to minimize waste and maximize efficiency.
  • Decentralized Production: Advanced manufacturing technologies like 3D printing could enable localized production of goods, reducing the need for long-distance transportation and centralized factories.
  • Space-Based Resources: By 3930, humanity might have established a significant presence in space. Access to resources from asteroids or other celestial bodies could further enhance sustainability efforts on Earth.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Unforeseen Technologies: It’s important to remember that technological progress is unpredictable. Entirely new technologies that we cannot even imagine today could emerge and revolutionize our approach to sustainability.
  • Ethical Considerations: As technologies advance, ethical considerations become increasingly important. Decisions about resource allocation, environmental management, and the use of powerful technologies will need careful thought and consideration.
  • Global Cooperation: Achieving true sustainability on a global scale will require unprecedented levels of cooperation and coordination among nations.

In Conclusion:

While we cannot know for sure what sustainable technology will look like in 3930, it’s safe to say that it will be far more advanced and integrated into our lives than it is today. By continuing to prioritize research, innovation, and ethical decision-making, we can create a future where technology and sustainability go hand in hand.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

It’s more accurate to ask who will benefit from sustainable technology in 3930, rather than who “requires” it. Here’s why:

  • Everyone will benefit: In 3930, sustainable technology will likely be deeply integrated into all aspects of life. This means everyone on the planet will benefit from a cleaner environment, more efficient resource use, and a more stable climate.
  • Future generations: Sustainable technology is fundamentally about ensuring a healthy planet for future generations. So, in a sense, they are the ones who “require” it most, as their well-being depends on it.
  • Ecosystems: It’s not just humans who will benefit. Sustainable technology will help protect and restore natural ecosystems, ensuring the survival of diverse plant and animal life.

Think of it like this:

Imagine a city where the air is clean, the water is pure, and energy is abundant. Everyone in that city benefits, from the richest to the poorest. That’s what sustainable technology in 3930 could achieve on a global scale.

In short: Sustainable technology in 3930 will be essential for the well-being of all life on Earth, both present and future.

When is required Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

This is a really interesting question! It gets at the heart of why we talk about sustainability. Here’s how I’d approach it:

  • The need is NOW: While we’re talking about the year 3930, the need for sustainable technology is absolutely critical today. The choices we make now, in 2025, will determine what kind of world we leave for future generations.
  • A continuous process: Sustainable technology isn’t a destination, it’s a journey. We need to be constantly innovating and improving our technologies to minimize our impact on the planet. So, in a sense, the need for sustainable technology is ongoing, from now until 3930 and beyond.
  • Urgency: The longer we wait to adopt sustainable practices, the more difficult it will be to address challenges like climate change, resource depletion, and pollution. That’s why it’s so important to act now and accelerate the development and implementation of sustainable technologies.

Think of it like this:

Imagine you have a leaky faucet. You could ignore it for a while, but eventually, it’s going to cause a lot of damage. Sustainable technology is like fixing that faucet now to prevent bigger problems down the road.

In short: The need for sustainable technology is urgent and ongoing. It’s not just about 3930, it’s about ensuring a healthy planet for everyone, starting today.

COURTESY : Voith Group

Where is required Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

That’s a great question that requires us to think big! Here’s how I see it:

  • Everywhere on Earth: Sustainable technology in 3930 will need to be implemented everywhere, from bustling cities to remote villages. It will need to be integrated into our homes, workplaces, transportation systems, and even the way we grow our food.
  • Beyond Earth: By 3930, humanity might have a more established presence in space. Sustainable technology will be crucial for any off-world settlements or activities, ensuring we don’t repeat the mistakes of the past.
  • Ecosystems: Sustainable technology will need to be applied in ways that protect and restore natural ecosystems. This could involve things like advanced reforestation techniques, pollution cleanup technologies, and habitat preservation strategies.

Think of it like this:

Imagine a world where every building is powered by clean energy, every farm uses sustainable agriculture practices, and every factory operates with zero waste. That’s the kind of widespread implementation we’re talking about.

In short: Sustainable technology in 3930 will be needed everywhere, both on Earth and potentially beyond, to ensure a thriving and balanced future for all.

How is required Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

That’s a crucial question! It’s not just about what sustainable technology will exist in 3930, but how it will be developed and implemented. Here are some key aspects:

  • Continuous Innovation: Sustainable technology in 3930 will be the result of centuries of ongoing research, development, and refinement. It will require a global commitment to innovation and a willingness to explore new ideas and approaches.
  • Collaboration: Achieving true sustainability will require collaboration on an unprecedented scale. Scientists, engineers, policymakers, and individuals will need to work together to develop and implement sustainable solutions.
  • Education and Awareness: Future generations will need to be educated about the importance of sustainability and empowered to make informed choices. This will require integrating sustainability into education systems at all levels.
  • Ethical Considerations: As technologies advance, it will be crucial to consider the ethical implications of their use. This will involve careful thought and discussion about issues like resource allocation, environmental management, and the potential impacts on society.
  • Adaptive Management: The world of 3930 will likely be very different from today. Sustainable technology will need to be adaptable and flexible, able to respond to new challenges and changing conditions.

Think of it like this:

Building a sustainable future is like building a house. It requires a solid foundation (our current knowledge and technologies), a strong framework (collaboration and ethical considerations), and continuous maintenance and improvement (innovation and adaptation).

In short: Sustainable technology in 3930 will be the result of a long-term, collaborative, and ethical effort to create a world where technology and nature coexist in harmony. It will require a commitment to innovation, education, and adaptive management.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

It’s tricky to create a traditional “case study” for sustainable technology in 3930 because it’s so far in the future. However, we can build a hypothetical scenario based on current trends and potential advancements:

Case Study: The Integrated City of Aurora, 3930

Background:

By 3930, humanity has largely transitioned to a global civilization with a strong focus on sustainability. Cities are designed as integrated ecosystems, minimizing waste and maximizing efficiency. Aurora is a prime example, a city of 5 million people built on the principles of circularity and technological harmony with nature.

Sustainable Technologies in Action:

  • Energy: Aurora is powered by a network of fusion reactors and space-based solar arrays. Energy is distributed through a smart grid that optimizes consumption and minimizes loss. Every building is equipped with energy-harvesting surfaces, further contributing to the city’s power needs.
  • Waste Management: Aurora operates on a zero-waste system. All materials are endlessly recycled and reused within closed-loop manufacturing processes. Organic waste is converted into biogas for energy production and compost for urban farms.
  • Food Production: Vertical farms and hydroponic gardens are integrated into the city’s infrastructure, providing fresh, locally grown food for residents. Advanced biotechnology is used to enhance crop yields and nutritional value.
  • Transportation: Aurora features a network of high-speed, autonomous vehicles powered by clean energy. Public transportation is highly efficient and accessible. Walking and cycling are encouraged through green spaces and pedestrian-friendly design.
  • Water Management: Water is a precious resource in 3930. Aurora has a sophisticated water recycling system that purifies and reuses water for various purposes. Rainwater harvesting and atmospheric water generation are also utilized.
  • Built Environment: Buildings in Aurora are constructed from sustainable, self-healing materials. They are designed to be energy-efficient and integrate seamlessly with the natural environment. Green roofs and vertical gardens help to purify the air and regulate temperature.

Outcomes:

  • Environmental Harmony: Aurora has a minimal ecological footprint. Air and water quality are excellent, and biodiversity thrives within the city’s green spaces.
  • Resource Efficiency: The city operates on a circular economy model, minimizing waste and maximizing resource utilization.
  • Quality of Life: Residents of Aurora enjoy a high quality of life with access to clean energy, fresh food, efficient transportation, and a healthy environment.
  • Resilience: Aurora is designed to be resilient to climate change and other environmental challenges.

Lessons Learned:

  • Long-term Vision: The success of Aurora demonstrates the importance of long-term planning and a commitment to sustainability.
  • Technological Integration: Advanced technologies play a crucial role in achieving sustainability goals.
  • Global Cooperation: Aurora is part of a global network of sustainable cities, highlighting the importance of international cooperation.

Conclusion:

The case of Aurora provides a glimpse into the potential of sustainable technology in 3930. It shows that by prioritizing innovation, collaboration, and ethical considerations, humanity can create a future where technology and nature coexist in harmony.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

White paper on Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3930: A Vision for a Harmonious Future

Abstract:

This white paper explores the potential landscape of sustainable technology in the year 3930. While predicting the future with certainty is impossible, we can extrapolate from current trends and imagine the possibilities that lie ahead. This paper envisions a future where technology is deeply integrated with sustainable practices, creating a world of abundance, environmental harmony, and enhanced human well-being.

1. Introduction:

The pursuit of sustainability is a continuous journey, not a destination. By 3930, it is envisioned that humanity will have made significant strides in developing and implementing sustainable technologies across all aspects of life. This paper explores some potential advancements in key areas, acknowledging that unforeseen breakthroughs may reshape our understanding of what is possible.

2. Energy:

  • Fusion Power Dominance: Fusion energy, long a promise, is likely to be a primary energy source, providing clean, abundant power.
  • Space-Based Solar: Large-scale solar arrays in space capture vast amounts of solar energy and beam it back to Earth, supplementing terrestrial sources.
  • Ambient Energy Harvesting: Nanotechnology enables the harvesting of ambient energy from various sources like vibrations, heat, and even radio waves, powering small devices and sensors.
  • Hyper-Efficient Grids: Smart grids, enhanced by AI, optimize energy distribution and minimize loss, ensuring efficient energy use.

3. Resource Management:

  • Circular Economy Mastery: Closed-loop systems are the norm. Materials are endlessly recycled and reused, eliminating waste as we know it. “Mining” becomes a process of reclaiming and repurposing existing materials.
  • Advanced Material Science: Bio-engineered and self-healing materials are commonplace, increasing the lifespan of products and infrastructure.
  • Personalized Production: 3D printing and advanced manufacturing allow for on-demand, localized production, reducing transportation needs and waste.

4. Food and Agriculture:

  • Vertical and Urban Farming: High-tech vertical farms and hydroponic systems are integrated into urban environments, providing fresh, local produce.
  • Precision Agriculture: AI-powered systems optimize crop yields and minimize resource use in traditional agriculture.
  • Cultivated Meat and Alternative Proteins: Advanced biotechnology provides sustainable and ethical alternatives to traditional animal agriculture.

5. Environment and Ecosystems:

  • Climate Engineering: Safe and effective climate engineering technologies may be deployed to mitigate the effects of past environmental damage.
  • Ecosystem Restoration: Advanced biotechnology and ecological engineering are used to restore damaged ecosystems and enhance biodiversity.
  • Real-time Environmental Monitoring: A global network of sensors provides real-time data on environmental conditions, enabling rapid response to potential threats.

6. Transportation and Infrastructure:

  • Hyperloop Networks: High-speed hyperloop systems connect cities and regions, reducing travel times and energy consumption.
  • Autonomous Vehicles: AI-powered autonomous vehicles optimize traffic flow and reduce accidents.
  • Smart Infrastructure: Infrastructure is embedded with sensors and AI, enabling self-monitoring, self-repair, and optimized resource use.

7. Artificial Intelligence and Computation:

  • AI-Driven Optimization: AI is integrated into every aspect of life, optimizing resource use, managing complex systems, and enhancing decision-making.
  • Quantum Computing: Quantum computing enables breakthroughs in materials science, medicine, and other fields, accelerating the development of sustainable technologies.

8. Ethical Considerations:

  • Resource Equity: Global cooperation ensures equitable access to resources and technologies.
  • Environmental Stewardship: A strong ethical framework guides the development and use of technology, prioritizing environmental protection.
  • Human Augmentation: Careful consideration is given to the ethical implications of human augmentation technologies.

9. Conclusion:

The sustainable technology of 3930 represents a future where human ingenuity and environmental stewardship go hand in hand. By embracing innovation, fostering collaboration, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can create a world where technology empowers us to live in harmony with nature and ensures a prosperous future for generations to come. This vision is not merely aspirational; it is a roadmap guiding our actions today towards a more sustainable tomorrow.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

Let’s imagine some industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3930, building on the concepts we’ve discussed:

1. Advanced Materials Production:

  • Closed-Loop Factories: Factories operate on closed-loop systems, where all materials are recycled and reused indefinitely. “Waste” is a concept of the past. Imagine a factory that produces complex electronics, where every component is disassembled and the constituent materials are fed back into the production process.
  • Bio-Integrated Manufacturing: Biotechnology is integrated into manufacturing processes. Imagine “growing” materials with desired properties, reducing reliance on traditional resource extraction. Perhaps buildings are constructed from bio-engineered materials that can self-heal and adapt to environmental changes.
  • Nanomaterial Synthesis: Precise control over nanomaterials allows for the creation of incredibly strong, lightweight, and durable materials with specific functionalities. Imagine a factory that can “print” custom materials atom by atom, tailoring their properties for specific applications.

2. Energy-Intensive Industries:

  • Fusion-Powered Smelting: Industries like steel and aluminum production, which are currently energy-intensive, are powered by clean fusion energy. This dramatically reduces their environmental impact. Imagine a steel mill with zero carbon emissions.
  • Advanced Battery Production: Highly efficient and sustainable batteries are produced using advanced materials and manufacturing techniques. These batteries power everything from electric vehicles to industrial machinery. Imagine a battery factory that uses recycled materials and renewable energy to produce batteries with vastly superior energy density and lifespan compared to today’s technology.
  • Carbon Capture and Utilization: Even with clean energy sources, some industrial processes may still produce CO2 as a byproduct. Advanced carbon capture technologies capture this CO2 and convert it into useful products, such as fuels or building materials. Imagine a cement factory that captures and mineralizes CO2, effectively turning it into the building blocks of concrete.

3. Resource Extraction (or Lack Thereof):

  • Asteroid Mining (Sustainable Approach): If humanity expands into space, resource extraction from asteroids could be done sustainably, minimizing environmental impact on Earth. Imagine robotic mining operations on asteroids, powered by solar energy, providing essential resources without harming terrestrial ecosystems.
  • Urban Mining: The focus shifts to “urban mining,” reclaiming valuable materials from existing infrastructure and products at the end of their life cycle. Imagine specialized facilities that can efficiently disassemble and recycle complex products, recovering rare earth elements and other valuable materials.

4. Automation and Robotics:

  • AI-Optimized Production: AI manages and optimizes all aspects of industrial processes, from resource allocation to production schedules, minimizing waste and maximizing efficiency. Imagine a factory run entirely by AI, predicting demand, managing inventory, and optimizing production in real time.
  • Advanced Robotics: Highly dexterous robots perform complex tasks in manufacturing and resource recovery, increasing efficiency and safety. Imagine fleets of robots working in automated recycling facilities, sorting and processing materials with incredible precision.

5. Biotechnology Integration:

  • Bio-Manufacturing: Biological processes are used to produce a range of industrial products, from biofuels to bioplastics. Imagine factories that “grow” materials using engineered microorganisms.
  • Bioremediation: Biological processes are used to clean up industrial waste and pollution. Imagine factories that use bioreactors to treat wastewater and remove pollutants.

These are just a few examples. The key takeaway is that sustainable technology in 3930 will likely be characterized by closed-loop systems, advanced materials, clean energy, AI-driven optimization, and the integration of biotechnology. These advancements will not only reduce the environmental impact of industry but also create new opportunities for innovation and economic growth.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 3930 ?

It’s fascinating to imagine the kind of research and development that would lead to sustainable technology in 3930! Here’s a breakdown of potential areas of focus, keeping in mind that this is speculative but based on current trends:

1. Fundamental Science:

  • Advanced Physics: Research into fundamental forces and particles could unlock new energy sources (like more efficient fusion) or even ways to manipulate gravity for transportation.
  • Quantum Computing: Continued development of quantum computing would enable simulations and calculations far beyond our current capabilities, accelerating materials discovery and the design of complex systems.
  • Consciousness Studies: Understanding consciousness could lead to breakthroughs in AI, allowing for more intuitive and efficient human-computer interaction, which could be crucial for optimizing complex sustainable systems.

2. Materials Science:

  • Self-Healing Materials: Materials that can repair themselves would drastically increase the lifespan of infrastructure and products, reducing waste and resource consumption.
  • Adaptive Materials: Materials that can change their properties in response to environmental stimuli could be used to create dynamic buildings, adaptable transportation systems, and even clothing that adjusts to temperature.
  • Bio-Integrated Materials: Combining biological materials with synthetic ones could lead to incredibly strong, lightweight, and biodegradable materials with unique functionalities.

3. Energy Technologies:

  • Fusion Energy: Continued research into fusion power is crucial to make it a viable and efficient energy source. This includes research on plasma confinement, reactor design, and fuel cycles.
  • Space-Based Solar: Developing efficient ways to capture and transmit solar energy from space would provide a clean and abundant energy source. This involves research on space-based solar arrays, energy transmission technologies, and space infrastructure.
  • Exotic Energy Sources: Exploring more unconventional energy sources like zero-point energy or tapping into geothermal energy from deep within the Earth could provide new avenues for clean power generation.

4. Biotechnology:

  • Synthetic Biology: Designing and engineering new biological systems could lead to breakthroughs in biomanufacturing, bioremediation, and even energy production.
  • Genetic Engineering: Advancements in genetic engineering could be used to enhance crops, create disease-resistant plants, and even develop microorganisms that can break down pollutants.
  • Neurotechnology: Understanding the brain and nervous system could lead to more efficient human-computer interfaces, which could be used to manage complex systems and optimize resource use.

5. Artificial Intelligence:

  • General AI: Developing artificial intelligence that can reason, learn, and adapt like humans would be a major breakthrough. This could lead to AI systems that can manage entire cities, optimize resource use, and even develop new sustainable technologies.
  • AI-Driven Design: AI could be used to design everything from new materials to entire cities, optimizing for sustainability and efficiency.

6. Environmental Science:

  • Climate Modeling: Improving our understanding of climate systems and developing more accurate climate models is crucial for predicting and mitigating the effects of climate change.
  • Ecosystem Restoration: Research into ecological engineering and restoration techniques could help us repair damaged ecosystems and enhance biodiversity.
  • Geoengineering: Exploring safe and effective geoengineering technologies could provide tools to mitigate the effects of climate change, but this requires careful research and ethical considerations.

7. Social Sciences:

  • Sustainability Economics: Developing new economic models that prioritize sustainability and resource conservation is crucial for creating a truly sustainable future.
  • Behavioral Science: Understanding human behavior and motivations can help us design effective strategies for promoting sustainable practices.
  • Global Governance: Research into global governance and cooperation is essential for addressing global challenges like climate change and resource depletion.

Interdisciplinary Approach:

It’s important to emphasize that research and development in these areas will need to be highly interdisciplinary. Scientists, engineers, social scientists, and policymakers will need to work together to develop sustainable solutions that are both technologically feasible and socially acceptable.

Long-Term Vision:

The research and development that leads to sustainable technology in 3930 will require a long-term vision and a commitment to sustained investment. It’s not just about solving today’s problems, but also about laying the foundation for a sustainable future for generations to come.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

References

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

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »