Sustainable technology of 4680

79 / 100

Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

The 4680 battery, while revolutionary in its design and potential, still faces sustainability challenges. Here’s a breakdown of the key areas:

Material Sourcing:

Nickel and Lithium: The 4680 battery relies heavily on nickel and lithium, both of which have environmental and social concerns associated with their mining. Sustainable sourcing is crucial to minimize the impact.
Cobalt Reduction: Many 4680 battery chemistries aim to reduce or eliminate cobalt, a material with significant ethical and environmental issues. This is a positive step towards sustainability.

Manufacturing Processes:

Energy Intensity: Battery production is energy-intensive. Reducing the carbon footprint of manufacturing through renewable energy sources and efficient processes is essential.
Dry Electrode Technology: Some 4680 battery manufacturers are exploring dry electrode technology, which reduces the use of solvents and energy in the manufacturing process, making it more environmentally friendly.

Battery Lifespan and Recycling:

Durability: The 4680 battery is designed for a longer lifespan, which contributes to sustainability by reducing the need for frequent replacements.
Recycling Infrastructure: Developing robust recycling infrastructure for 4680 batteries is crucial to recover valuable materials and prevent environmental pollution.

Overall Sustainability:

Reduced Environmental Impact: Compared to traditional batteries, the 4680 offers a smaller environmental footprint due to its higher energy density and potential for longer lifespan.
Enabling Sustainable Transportation: By improving the range and affordability of electric vehicles, the 4680 battery plays a key role in the transition to sustainable transportation.

Challenges and Future Directions:

Scaling Production: As demand for 4680 batteries increases, ensuring sustainable practices across the supply chain will be crucial.
Technological Advancements: Ongoing research and development are needed to further improve the sustainability of 4680 batteries, including exploring new materials and manufacturing processes.

In conclusion, the 4680 battery represents a significant step towards more sustainable energy storage. However, continuous efforts are needed to address the environmental and social challenges associated with its production and lifecycle.

What is Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

The 4680 battery, while a significant advancement in battery technology, still presents some sustainability challenges. Here’s a breakdown of the key areas:

Material Sourcing:

Nickel and Lithium: The 4680 battery relies heavily on nickel and lithium, both of which have environmental and social concerns associated with their mining. Sustainable sourcing is crucial to minimize the impact.
Cobalt Reduction: Many 4680 battery chemistries aim to reduce or eliminate cobalt, a material with significant ethical and environmental issues. This is a positive step towards sustainability.

Manufacturing Processes:

Energy Intensity: Battery production is energy-intensive. Reducing the carbon footprint of manufacturing through renewable energy sources and efficient processes is essential.
Dry Electrode Technology: Some 4680 battery manufacturers are exploring dry electrode technology, which reduces the use of solvents and energy in the manufacturing process, making it more environmentally friendly.

Battery Lifespan and Recycling:

Durability: The 4680 battery is designed for a longer lifespan, which contributes to sustainability by reducing the need for frequent replacements.
Recycling Infrastructure: Developing robust recycling infrastructure for 4680 batteries is crucial to recover valuable materials and prevent environmental pollution.

Overall Sustainability:

Reduced Environmental Impact: Compared to traditional batteries, the 4680 offers a smaller environmental footprint due to its higher energy density and potential for longer lifespan.
Enabling Sustainable Transportation: By improving the range and affordability of electric vehicles, the 4680 battery plays a key role in the transition to sustainable transportation.

Challenges and Future Directions:

Scaling Production: As demand for 4680 batteries increases, ensuring sustainable practices across the supply chain will be crucial.
Technological Advancements: Ongoing research and development are needed to further improve the sustainability of 4680 batteries, including exploring new materials and manufacturing processes.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is driven by a wide range of stakeholders, including:

Electric Vehicle Manufacturers: Companies like Tesla, who are pioneering the use of 4680 batteries, have a strong interest in sustainable technology to reduce the environmental impact of their vehicles and meet growing consumer demand for eco-friendly products.
Battery Producers: Companies involved in the manufacturing of 4680 batteries, such as LG Energy Solution and Samsung SDI, are recognizing the importance of sustainable practices to ensure the long-term viability of their products and comply with environmental regulations.
Consumers: Increasingly environmentally conscious consumers are seeking out products with a lower carbon footprint. This demand is pushing manufacturers to adopt more sustainable technologies in their products, including 4680 batteries.
Governments and Regulators: Governments worldwide are implementing stricter environmental regulations and promoting sustainable practices to combat climate change. This is driving the need for sustainable technology in various industries, including battery production.
Investors: Investors are increasingly considering environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors in their investment decisions. Companies with strong sustainability practices are more likely to attract investment, further driving the need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries.
Environmental Organizations: NGOs and environmental groups play a crucial role in raising awareness about the environmental impact of battery production and advocating for more sustainable practices.
Communities: Communities near mining sites and battery manufacturing facilities are directly affected by the environmental and social impacts of these operations. Their concerns about sustainability are a significant driver for change.

In essence, the push for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is a collective effort driven by various stakeholders with a shared interest in minimizing the environmental impact of this technology and ensuring a more sustainable future for energy storage.

When is required Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is not a future concern, but a present and urgent requirement. Here’s why:

Immediate Environmental Impact: The environmental impact of battery production, including resource extraction and manufacturing processes, is happening now. Implementing sustainable practices from the outset is crucial to minimize this impact.
Growing Demand: The demand for 4680 batteries is rapidly increasing, driven by the growth of the electric vehicle market. Without sustainable technology, the environmental challenges will only escalate as production scales up.
Long-Term Sustainability: The transition to electric vehicles and renewable energy requires long-term sustainability. Sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is essential to ensure that this transition is truly environmentally friendly and doesn’t create new problems.
Regulatory Pressure: Governments are increasingly implementing regulations to promote sustainable practices and reduce environmental impact. This is creating a need for companies to adopt sustainable technology in their products, including 4680 batteries.
Consumer Expectations: Consumers are becoming more aware of the environmental and social impact of their purchases. They are increasingly demanding sustainable products, which is driving the need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries.

In conclusion, the need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is not something that can be postponed. It is a present requirement driven by environmental concerns, growing demand, regulatory pressure, and consumer expectations. Implementing sustainable practices now is crucial to ensure a truly sustainable future for energy storage and transportation.

COURTESY : TURILYTIX

Where is required Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is relevant across the entire lifecycle of the battery, from material sourcing to end-of-life management. Here are some key areas where sustainable technology is required:

1. Material Sourcing:

Mining and Extraction: Sustainable practices are needed at the source of raw materials like lithium, nickel, and cobalt. This includes responsible mining practices, minimizing environmental impact, and ensuring fair labor conditions.
Supply Chain Transparency: Tracing the origin of materials and ensuring ethical sourcing throughout the supply chain is crucial for sustainability.

2. Manufacturing:

Battery Production Facilities: Sustainable manufacturing processes are needed in the factories where 4680 batteries are produced. This includes reducing energy consumption, minimizing waste, and using environmentally friendly materials.
Dry Electrode Technology: Implementing dry electrode technology can significantly reduce the environmental impact of battery manufacturing by eliminating the need for solvents.

3. Battery Use:

Electric Vehicles: Sustainable technology in 4680 batteries is essential for the widespread adoption of electric vehicles, which contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution.
Energy Storage Systems: 4680 batteries are also used in stationary energy storage systems, which play a crucial role in integrating renewable energy sources into the grid. Sustainable technology is needed to ensure the long-term viability of these systems.

4. End-of-Life Management:

Recycling Infrastructure: Developing robust recycling infrastructure for 4680 batteries is crucial to recover valuable materials and prevent environmental pollution. Sustainable recycling processes are needed to minimize waste and maximize resource recovery.
Second-Life Applications: Exploring second-life applications for 4680 batteries, such as repurposing them for less demanding applications after their use in electric vehicles, can further enhance sustainability.

In conclusion, the need for sustainable technology in 4680 batteries spans across the entire lifecycle, from material sourcing to end-of-life management. Implementing sustainable practices in all these areas is crucial to minimize the environmental impact of this technology and ensure a truly sustainable future for energy storage and transportation.

How is required Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

Achieving sustainable technology in 4680 batteries requires a multi-faceted approach that addresses various aspects of the battery’s lifecycle. Here’s how it can be achieved:

1. Sustainable Material Sourcing:

Responsible Mining Practices: Implementing stricter environmental and social standards for mining operations to minimize habitat destruction, pollution, and human rights violations.
Recycled Materials: Increasing the use of recycled materials in battery production to reduce reliance on virgin resources and create a circular economy.
Alternative Materials: Researching and developing alternative materials with lower environmental impact and more sustainable sourcing.

2. Sustainable Manufacturing:

Renewable Energy: Powering battery manufacturing facilities with renewable energy sources like solar and wind to reduce the carbon footprint.
Energy Efficiency: Implementing energy-efficient processes and equipment in manufacturing to minimize energy consumption.
Waste Reduction: Minimizing waste generation in manufacturing through efficient processes and recycling of byproducts.
Dry Electrode Technology: Adopting dry electrode technology to eliminate the use of harmful solvents in battery production.

3. Sustainable Battery Use:

Long Lifespan: Designing 4680 batteries for a longer lifespan to reduce the need for frequent replacements and minimize waste.
Efficient Charging: Developing fast and efficient charging technologies to minimize energy loss during charging.
Second-Life Applications: Repurposing used 4680 batteries for less demanding applications after their use in electric vehicles to extend their overall lifespan.

4. Sustainable End-of-Life Management:

Recycling Infrastructure: Investing in robust recycling infrastructure to efficiently recover valuable materials from spent 4680 batteries.
Advanced Recycling Technologies: Developing and implementing advanced recycling technologies to maximize material recovery and minimize waste.
Responsible Disposal: Ensuring proper disposal of 4680 batteries to prevent environmental pollution.

5. Collaboration and Innovation:

Industry Collaboration: Fostering collaboration among stakeholders, including manufacturers, researchers, and policymakers, to drive innovation in sustainable battery technology.
Research and Development: Investing in research and development to explore new materials, manufacturing processes, and recycling technologies for 4680 batteries.

By implementing these strategies, the 4680 battery can become a truly sustainable energy storage solution, contributing to a cleaner and more environmentally friendly future.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

While the 4680 battery is still relatively new and widespread adoption is in its early stages, making a full-scale “case study” difficult, we can examine Tesla’s approach as a leading example of how sustainable technology is being integrated with 4680 batteries:

Tesla’s Approach to Sustainable 4680 Battery Technology:

Tesla is heavily invested in the development and deployment of 4680 batteries and has publicly stated its commitment to sustainability. Here’s a breakdown of their key areas:

Vertical Integration and Supply Chain Control: Tesla is aiming for greater control over its supply chain, from raw material sourcing to battery manufacturing. This allows them to implement stricter sustainability standards throughout the process. They’ve discussed direct involvement in lithium mining and refining, as well as partnerships with other mining companies who prioritize sustainable practices.
Focus on Material Sourcing: Tesla has emphasized responsible sourcing of raw materials, particularly lithium and nickel. They’ve explored partnerships with companies committed to ethical and environmentally sound mining practices. They also aim to reduce or eliminate the use of cobalt.
In-House Manufacturing: Tesla is building its own battery manufacturing facilities, giving them greater control over the production process. This allows them to implement sustainable manufacturing practices, such as using renewable energy and minimizing waste. Their focus on dry electrode technology is a key part of this.
Dry Battery Electrode Technology: Tesla is investing heavily in dry battery electrode technology, which significantly reduces the use of solvents and energy in the manufacturing process, making it more environmentally friendly. This is a significant step towards more sustainable manufacturing.
Battery Recycling: Tesla has stated its commitment to battery recycling and is developing its own recycling processes. This is crucial for recovering valuable materials and preventing environmental pollution. They are working on closed-loop recycling.
Battery Design for Longevity: The 4680 cell’s design and chemistry are geared towards longer lifespan and improved cycle life. This reduces the need for frequent battery replacements, a key factor in sustainability.
Integration with Renewable Energy: Tesla’s broader mission is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy. The 4680 battery plays a crucial role in this by enabling affordable and long-range electric vehicles, as well as stationary energy storage solutions.

Challenges and Ongoing Development:

It’s important to note that Tesla’s approach is still evolving. Scaling up 4680 battery production and ensuring sustainable practices across the entire supply chain remains a significant challenge. The technology is still under development, and the long-term sustainability impacts will depend on the continued innovation and implementation of best practices.

Why Tesla is a Good (though not perfect) Example:

Tesla’s approach highlights the key elements of sustainable 4680 battery technology: responsible material sourcing, sustainable manufacturing processes, long lifespan, and robust recycling. While they face challenges, their focus on vertical integration, dry electrode technology, and closed-loop recycling makes them a prominent example of a company striving for greater sustainability in this crucial technology. As more manufacturers adopt 4680 cells, their practices will hopefully follow suit

COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

White paper on Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology for 4680 Batteries

Abstract:

The 4680 battery represents a significant leap forward in battery technology, offering higher energy density and improved performance. However, realizing the full potential of 4680 batteries requires a strong focus on sustainability throughout their lifecycle. This white paper examines the key challenges and opportunities related to sustainable 4680 battery technology, covering material sourcing, manufacturing, usage, and end-of-life management. It proposes strategies and recommendations for stakeholders to ensure the responsible and environmentally sound development and deployment of this crucial technology.

1. Introduction:

The global push for electrification, particularly in transportation and energy storage, has created unprecedented demand for advanced battery technologies. The 4680 battery, with its larger form factor and potential for improved energy density, is poised to play a crucial role in meeting this demand. However, the sustainability of these batteries is paramount. This paper argues that sustainability must be a core consideration from the initial design phase through to end-of-life management.

2. Challenges and Opportunities:

2.1 Material Sourcing:

Challenge: The extraction of key materials like lithium, nickel, and cobalt can have significant environmental and social impacts, including habitat destruction, water pollution, and human rights concerns.
Opportunity: Implementing responsible mining practices, utilizing recycled materials, and exploring alternative battery chemistries with lower environmental footprints. Supply chain transparency and traceability are essential.

2.2 Manufacturing:

Challenge: Battery manufacturing is energy-intensive and can generate significant waste. Traditional manufacturing processes often rely on harmful solvents.
Opportunity: Transitioning to renewable energy sources for manufacturing, implementing energy-efficient processes, minimizing waste, and adopting innovative technologies like dry electrode processing.

2.3 Usage:

Challenge: Ensuring the long-term durability and performance of 4680 batteries in diverse applications, including electric vehicles and stationary energy storage.
Opportunity: Optimizing battery design and management systems for extended lifespan, promoting efficient charging practices, and exploring second-life applications for used batteries.

2.4 End-of-Life Management:

Challenge: Developing robust and cost-effective recycling processes to recover valuable materials from spent 4680 batteries and prevent environmental pollution.
Opportunity: Investing in advanced recycling technologies, establishing closed-loop recycling systems, and promoting responsible disposal practices.

3. Strategies for Sustainable 4680 Battery Technology:

Life Cycle Assessment (LCA): Conducting thorough LCAs to evaluate the environmental impacts of 4680 batteries throughout their entire lifecycle, from material sourcing to end-of-life management.
Sustainable Supply Chains: Implementing responsible sourcing practices, ensuring supply chain transparency, and promoting ethical labor conditions.
Green Manufacturing: Transitioning to renewable energy-powered manufacturing facilities, adopting energy-efficient processes, and minimizing waste generation.
Circular Economy Principles: Embracing circular economy principles by prioritizing material recovery, reuse, and recycling.
Technological Innovation: Investing in research and development to explore new materials, manufacturing processes, and recycling technologies that further enhance sustainability.
Policy and Regulation: Implementing supportive policies and regulations to promote sustainable battery technology and incentivize responsible practices.
Collaboration and Partnerships: Fostering collaboration among stakeholders, including manufacturers, researchers, policymakers, and consumers, to drive innovation and accelerate the transition to sustainable battery technology.

4. Recommendations:

For Manufacturers: Prioritize sustainable material sourcing, invest in green manufacturing processes, and design batteries for long lifespan and recyclability.
For Policymakers: Implement regulations that promote sustainable battery technology, incentivize recycling, and support research and development.
For Consumers: Make informed purchasing decisions, support companies committed to sustainability, and participate in battery recycling programs.
For Researchers: Focus on developing new materials, manufacturing processes, and recycling technologies that minimize environmental impact.

5. Conclusion:

The 4680 battery holds immense potential to accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy future. However, realizing this potential requires a concerted effort from all stakeholders to prioritize sustainability throughout the battery’s lifecycle. By embracing the strategies and recommendations outlined in this white paper, we can ensure that 4680 batteries contribute to a cleaner, more environmentally friendly future.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

You’re right to ask about industrial applications! While the 4680 battery is making waves in the EV world, its sustainability features are also highly relevant for various industrial applications. Here are some key examples:

1. Stationary Energy Storage Systems (ESS):

Grid-scale storage: 4680 batteries can be used in large-scale ESS to store excess renewable energy (solar, wind) and stabilize the grid. Sustainable technology is crucial here to ensure these systems are long-lasting, have minimal environmental impact, and can be efficiently recycled at the end of their life.
Microgrids: 4680 batteries can power microgrids in remote areas or for critical infrastructure (hospitals, data centers). Sustainability is important for these applications due to the often remote locations and the need for reliable, long-term power.
Commercial and industrial facilities: Businesses can use 4680 batteries for backup power, peak shaving (reducing energy costs), and to integrate on-site renewable energy generation. Sustainability helps companies meet their own environmental goals and potentially reduce operational costs.

2. Industrial Equipment and Machinery:

Electric vehicles (EVs) in industrial settings: Forklifts, construction equipment, mining vehicles, and other industrial vehicles are increasingly being electrified. Sustainable 4680 batteries offer the high power and long life needed for these demanding applications, while minimizing environmental impact.
Robotics and automation: 4680 batteries can power robots and automated systems in manufacturing, logistics, and other industries. Sustainability is important for these applications as they become more prevalent, ensuring responsible manufacturing and end-of-life management.

3. Aerospace and Defense:

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs): 4680 batteries can provide the high energy density and power needed for UAVs, while sustainability is crucial for minimizing the environmental footprint of these applications.
Aerospace applications: The lightweight and high-energy properties of 4680 batteries make them attractive for various aerospace applications, where sustainability is increasingly important.

4. Marine and Off-Grid Applications:

Electric boats and ships: 4680 batteries can power electric vessels, reducing emissions and reliance on fossil fuels. Sustainability is key in these applications to protect marine ecosystems.
Remote power systems: 4680 batteries can be used in remote locations for off-grid power generation. Sustainability is crucial here due to the often sensitive environments and the need for long-lasting, low-maintenance solutions.

Key Sustainability Considerations for Industrial Applications:

Long lifespan and reliability: Industrial applications often require batteries with a long lifespan and high reliability. Sustainable technology can contribute to this by focusing on durable materials, efficient thermal management, and robust battery management systems.
Safety: Safety is paramount in industrial settings. Sustainable technology can enhance safety by incorporating features that prevent thermal runaway and other hazards.
Cost-effectiveness: Cost is a major factor in industrial applications. Sustainable technology can contribute to cost-effectiveness by reducing material costs, improving manufacturing efficiency, and extending battery lifespan.
Environmental impact: Minimizing the environmental impact of batteries is crucial in all industrial applications. Sustainable technology can help achieve this by focusing on responsible material sourcing, green manufacturing, and robust recycling processes.

By focusing on these sustainability considerations, 4680 batteries can play a significant role in making various industrial sectors more environmentally friendly and efficient.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4680 ?

You’re hitting on a crucial point! Research and development (R&D) is absolutely essential to making 4680 batteries truly sustainable. Here’s a breakdown of key areas where R&D efforts are focused:

1. Sustainable Material Sourcing and Development:

Reducing reliance on critical materials: R&D is exploring alternative battery chemistries that reduce or eliminate the need for materials with environmental or ethical concerns, such as cobalt. This includes research into:
- Lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) cathodes: These offer a more sustainable and cost-effective alternative to nickel-manganese-cobalt (NMC) or nickel-cobalt-aluminum (NCA) cathodes, though they may have lower energy density.
- Sodium-ion batteries: These use abundant and widely available sodium instead of lithium, offering a potentially more sustainable option.
Improving material extraction and processing: R&D is focused on developing more sustainable mining practices that minimize environmental impact and improve the efficiency of material extraction. This includes:
- In-situ recovery: This technique extracts minerals from the ground without the need for traditional open-pit mining, reducing habitat destruction and waste.
- Closed-loop refining: This involves recovering and reusing chemicals used in the refining process, minimizing waste and pollution.
Developing synthetic or bio-based materials: R&D is exploring the use of synthetic or bio-based materials for battery components, reducing reliance on mined resources.

2. Sustainable Manufacturing Processes:

Dry electrode technology: This technology eliminates the need for solvents in the manufacturing process, reducing energy consumption and pollution. R&D is focused on improving the efficiency and scalability of dry electrode technology.
Reducing energy consumption: R&D is exploring ways to reduce the energy intensity of battery manufacturing processes, such as optimizing production processes and using renewable energy sources.
Minimizing waste: R&D is focused on developing manufacturing processes that minimize waste generation and maximize material utilization. This includes exploring closed-loop manufacturing systems where byproducts are recycled and reused.

3. Extending Battery Lifespan and Performance:

Improving battery chemistry: R&D is focused on developing new battery chemistries that offer longer lifespan, improved performance, and enhanced safety. This includes research into:
- Solid-state batteries: These use solid electrolytes instead of liquid ones, offering the potential for increased safety and energy density.
- Advanced cathode and anode materials: R&D is exploring new materials that can improve battery performance and lifespan.
Developing advanced battery management systems (BMS): R&D is focused on developing sophisticated BMS that can optimize battery performance, extend lifespan, and enhance safety. This includes:
- Predictive maintenance: Using AI and machine learning to predict battery health and identify potential issues before they occur.
- Adaptive charging: Optimizing charging protocols to minimize stress on the battery and extend its lifespan.

4. Enhancing Battery Recycling and End-of-Life Management:

Developing advanced recycling technologies: R&D is focused on developing more efficient and cost-effective recycling processes to recover valuable materials from spent 4680 batteries. This includes:
- Hydrometallurgical recycling: This process uses chemicals to extract valuable metals from batteries.
- Pyrometallurgical recycling: This process uses high temperatures to recover metals from batteries.
Exploring second-life applications: R&D is investigating ways to repurpose used 4680 batteries for less demanding applications, such as stationary energy storage, after their use in electric vehicles.
Designing for recyclability: R&D is focused on designing 4680 batteries with recyclability in mind, making it easier to disassemble and recover materials at the end of their life.

Collaboration and Funding:

Significant R&D efforts in sustainable 4680 battery technology are being conducted by:

Battery manufacturers: Companies like Tesla, LG Energy Solution, and Samsung SDI are investing heavily in R&D to improve the sustainability of their 4680 batteries.
Research institutions: Universities and research labs around the world are conducting research on new materials, manufacturing processes, and recycling technologies.
Government agencies: Governments are providing funding for R&D in sustainable battery technology through grants and initiatives.

By continuing to invest in R&D, we can accelerate the development of sustainable 4680 battery technology and ensure that these batteries play a crucial role in a cleaner and more environmentally friendly future.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

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.