Leave a Comment / Blog, Sustainable Technology of 2020, sustainable technology of 4690 / By
79 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

The Intel Core i5-4690 is a 4th generation processor that was released in 2014. While it is still a capable processor for many tasks, it is not considered to be a sustainable technology by today’s standards.

Here are some reasons why:

  • Energy efficiency: The i5-4690 is based on a 22nm manufacturing process, which is less energy-efficient than newer processors that use smaller process nodes (e.g., 14nm, 10nm, or even smaller). This means that the i5-4690 consumes more power and generates more heat than newer processors, which can contribute to higher electricity bills and a larger carbon footprint.
  • Performance: The i5-4690 is a mid-range processor that was released almost a decade ago. While it can still handle many everyday tasks, it may struggle with more demanding applications, such as video editing or gaming. Upgrading to a newer processor can improve performance and reduce the time it takes to complete tasks, which can indirectly contribute to sustainability by reducing energy consumption.
  • Longevity: The i5-4690 is an older processor that is no longer supported by Intel. This means that it may be difficult to find drivers or updates for the processor, which can make it more vulnerable to security risks and reduce its overall lifespan. Upgrading to a newer processor can provide access to the latest security features and extend the life of your computer.

Overall, the Intel Core i5-4690 is not considered to be a sustainable technology by today’s standards. Upgrading to a newer processor can offer several benefits, including improved energy efficiency, performance, and longevity.

Here are some resources that you may find helpful:

What is Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

It seems you’re asking about the sustainable aspects of using an Intel Core i5-4690 in 2025. Here’s a breakdown:

Why the i5-4690 isn’t considered sustainable in 2025:

  • Energy Efficiency: This CPU uses a 22nm manufacturing process. Newer CPUs use much smaller processes (like 10nm or even smaller), meaning they use less power for the same performance. The i5-4690 will consume more electricity and generate more heat.
  • Performance: It’s an older mid-range processor. While okay for basic tasks, it will struggle with demanding applications (video editing, gaming). This can lead to longer processing times, indirectly increasing energy use.
  • Longevity: Intel no longer supports it. Finding drivers or updates might be difficult, increasing security risks and shortening its lifespan.

Sustainable Alternatives:

  • Modern CPUs: Newer processors offer better performance per watt, reducing energy consumption. Look for CPUs with smaller nanometer manufacturing processes.
  • Consider Refurbished: If you don’t need the absolute latest, a refurbished computer with a slightly newer CPU can be a good balance of performance and environmental impact.

How to make the most of an i5-4690 (if you have one):

  • Optimize Software: Use lightweight applications and keep your system clean to reduce the load on the CPU.
  • Proper Cooling: Ensure good airflow and consider reapplying thermal paste to keep temperatures down, improving efficiency.
  • Upgrade Other Components: If possible, upgrading to an SSD can improve overall system responsiveness, reducing the time the CPU needs to work.

Important Note: While the i5-4690 itself might not be the most sustainable option, the biggest environmental impact often comes from manufacturing and disposal. If you already have this CPU, using it for as long as possible before responsibly recycling it is better than immediately buying a new one.

What is Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

You’re asking a great question that gets at the heart of what “sustainable technology” really means, especially when applied to older hardware like the Intel Core i5-4690.

Here’s the thing: in 2025, a CPU released in 2014 isn’t going to be at the cutting edge of energy efficiency or performance. Newer CPUs are built on much smaller manufacturing processes (think 10nm vs. 22nm for the i5-4690), which means they can do more work with less power.

So, is the i5-4690 “sustainable”? Not really, if you’re comparing it to the latest and greatest.

But here’s a more nuanced way to look at it:

  • The most sustainable option is often the one you already have. Manufacturing new electronics has a significant environmental impact. If you already own a computer with an i5-4690, using it for as long as possible is generally more sustainable than buying a brand new machine.
  • Maximize its lifespan. You can make the i5-4690 more sustainable by:
    • Keeping it cool: Good airflow and fresh thermal paste can improve efficiency.
    • Using lightweight software: This reduces the load on the CPU, saving energy.
    • Upgrading other parts: An SSD can make your system feel faster overall, even if the CPU is older.

Ultimately, sustainability is about minimizing your impact. If you need a new computer, consider newer, more efficient CPUs. But if you have an i5-4690, don’t feel guilty about using it! Just make sure to recycle it responsibly when it’s finally time to upgrade.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

It’s not about who requires sustainable technology for an i5-4690, but rather who benefits most from it. Here’s a breakdown:

  • Individuals using an i5-4690:
    • Benefit: By optimizing its use (keeping it cool, using lightweight software), they can reduce their electricity bill and contribute to a smaller carbon footprint.
    • Not Required: No one is forcing them to use sustainable practices with this CPU. It’s a personal choice.
  • Businesses with i5-4690 systems:
    • Benefit: Similar to individuals, they can save on energy costs and demonstrate environmental responsibility. This can be important for their image and may even attract customers who value sustainability.
    • Not Required: Again, it’s a choice, though businesses are increasingly under pressure to adopt sustainable practices.
  • The Environment:
    • Biggest Beneficiary: Reduced energy consumption means less strain on resources and a smaller contribution to climate change.

Key takeaway:

Sustainable technology applied to an i5-4690 is about making the most of existing hardware to minimize environmental impact. It’s not a strict requirement, but a responsible choice that benefits everyone in the long run.

When is required Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

You’re right to think about when sustainable technology becomes especially important for an older CPU like the i5-4690. Here’s when it matters most:

  • When you’re pushing the CPU hard: If you’re using the i5-4690 for demanding tasks (even if it’s just occasionally), that’s when its inefficiencies become more apparent. This could be:
    • Video editing
    • Gaming
    • Running complex simulations
    • Heavy multitasking
  • When energy costs are a concern: If you’re paying for electricity, maximizing the efficiency of your i5-4690 directly translates to lower bills. This is especially relevant for:
    • Home users on a budget
    • Businesses with many i5-4690 systems
  • When you’re concerned about environmental impact: Every bit of energy saved reduces your carbon footprint. This is important for:
    • Individuals with strong environmental values
    • Organizations with sustainability goals
  • When the i5-4690 is part of a larger system: Even if the CPU itself isn’t a huge power hog, it’s part of a computer that includes other components (monitor, storage, etc.). Optimizing the whole system for energy efficiency makes a bigger difference.

Essentially, the “when” comes down to these factors:

  • Intensity of use
  • Cost of energy
  • Personal or organizational values

No matter when you use it, applying sustainable practices to your i5-4690 is always a good idea to some degree!

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

The “where” of sustainable technology for an i5-4690 isn’t a physical location, but rather the contexts in which it’s relevant. It’s less about a place and more about the situation. Here’s where it matters:

  • In any computer using an i5-4690: Whether it’s a home PC, an office workstation, or even a server (though less common for servers these days), the principles of sustainable use apply.
  • Within the system itself: Sustainable practices should be considered for the whole computer, not just the CPU. This includes:
    • Cooling: Good airflow and efficient cooling solutions.
    • Power supply: Using an efficient PSU.
    • Storage: SSDs generally use less power than traditional hard drives.
    • Peripherals: Energy-efficient monitors and other devices.
  • In the user’s mindset: The “where” also exists in the user’s approach. Sustainability is about:
    • Awareness: Understanding the impact of energy consumption.
    • Action: Taking steps to optimize usage.
    • Responsibility: Properly recycling the hardware when it’s no longer needed.
  • In the broader context of e-waste: Sustainable practices extend to the responsible disposal and recycling of the entire computer when it’s retired. This prevents harmful materials from entering the environment.

So, while there’s no single physical “where,” the principles of sustainable technology for an i5-4690 apply everywhere that CPU is used, and extend to the user’s actions and the lifecycle of the hardware.

How is required Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

You’re asking how to implement sustainable practices with an i5-4690. It’s not about adding something to the CPU, but rather about how you use it and the system it’s in. Here’s a breakdown:

1. Optimize System Performance:

  • Keep it cool: Ensure good airflow within the computer case. Clean fans and vents regularly. Consider reapplying thermal paste to the CPU for better heat transfer. Lower temperatures improve efficiency.
  • Upgrade storage: Switching from a traditional hard drive (HDD) to a Solid State Drive (SSD) can significantly improve system responsiveness. This means the CPU spends less time waiting for data, indirectly saving energy.
  • Maximize RAM: Sufficient RAM prevents the system from relying on slower virtual memory, which can put more strain on the CPU.

2. Use Software Efficiently:

  • Lightweight applications: Choose software that’s optimized for performance and doesn’t unnecessarily tax the CPU.
  • Close unnecessary programs: Avoid running multiple applications simultaneously if you don’t need them.
  • Keep software updated: Updates often include performance improvements and bug fixes that can lead to better efficiency.

3. Manage Power Settings:

  • Adjust power plan: Use a power plan that balances performance and energy consumption. Explore options like “Balanced” or “Power Saver.”
  • Turn off unused peripherals: Disconnect or power down devices you’re not actively using.
  • Sleep/Hibernate: Put your computer to sleep or hibernate when you’re not using it to minimize power consumption.

4. Responsible Disposal:

  • Recycle: When you eventually upgrade, recycle the entire computer responsibly. This prevents hazardous materials from ending up in landfills.

5. Consider the Whole System:

  • Efficient PSU: Use a power supply unit (PSU) with a high efficiency rating (80+ Plus certified).
  • Energy-efficient monitor: Choose a monitor that consumes less power.

In summary: Sustainable technology with an i5-4690 is about optimizing its use within the system, using software efficiently, managing power, and responsible disposal. It’s a holistic approach that minimizes the environmental impact of using older hardware.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

Let’s frame a case study around the sustainable use of an i5-4690. Since we can’t conduct a real-world experiment here, this will be a hypothetical case study based on the principles of sustainable technology.

Case Study: Extending the Life of an i5-4690 System for a Small Business

Background: “Green Tech Solutions,” a small web design firm, has several workstations using i5-4690 processors. The systems are still functional for their current workload, but the company is considering upgrading due to concerns about performance and energy consumption. However, budget constraints are a major factor.

Challenge: How can Green Tech Solutions maximize the lifespan of their existing i5-4690 systems while minimizing their environmental impact and potentially improving performance within a reasonable budget?

Solution: Green Tech Solutions implements the following sustainable technology practices:

  1. System Optimization:
    • Storage Upgrade: All workstations are upgraded with SSDs. This drastically improves boot times, application loading, and overall system responsiveness, reducing the time the CPUs need to work at full capacity.
    • RAM Refresh: The RAM in some systems is increased to the maximum supported amount. This reduces reliance on virtual memory, decreasing CPU load.
    • Cooling Improvements: Cases are cleaned, fans are checked and replaced where necessary, and thermal paste on the CPUs is reapplied. This ensures efficient heat dissipation, improving performance and longevity.
  2. Software Efficiency:
    • Lightweight Software: Employees are encouraged to use lightweight applications where possible. For example, image editing software is chosen based on actual needs, avoiding resource-heavy suites if basic tasks suffice.
    • Software Updates: All operating systems and applications are kept up-to-date to benefit from performance improvements and bug fixes.
    • Virtualization (where applicable): For certain tasks, virtualization is explored to consolidate some less resource-intensive applications onto fewer physical machines.
  3. Power Management:
    • Power Plans: Workstations are configured with balanced power plans.
    • Sleep/Hibernate: Employees are trained to use sleep or hibernate modes when leaving their workstations idle.
    • Peripheral Management: Unused peripherals are disconnected or powered down.
  4. Responsible Disposal:
    • E-waste Recycling: Green Tech Solutions partners with a certified e-waste recycler to ensure proper disposal of old hardware when upgrades are eventually necessary.

Results (Hypothetical):

  • Performance Improvement: The SSD and RAM upgrades provide a noticeable boost in system responsiveness, making the i5-4690 systems feel significantly faster, even though the CPU itself hasn’t changed. This reduces employee frustration and improves productivity.
  • Energy Savings: Improved cooling, efficient storage, and better power management lead to a measurable reduction in electricity consumption.
  • Cost Savings: Deferring the purchase of new systems saves the company a significant amount of money in the short term.
  • Environmental Impact Reduction: Extending the life of existing hardware reduces the demand for new manufacturing, minimizing resource depletion and e-waste generation.

Conclusion:

This case study demonstrates that by implementing sustainable technology practices, Green Tech Solutions was able to extend the useful life of their i5-4690 systems, improve performance, reduce energy consumption, and save money. While the i5-4690 isn’t the most energy-efficient CPU by modern standards, responsible use and optimization can significantly mitigate its environmental impact and provide continued value for years to come. This approach highlights the importance of considering the entire system and user behavior when striving for sustainable technology solutions

.COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

White paper on Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

White Paper: Extending the Lifecycle of Legacy Hardware: A Case Study in Sustainable Use of the Intel i5-4690

Abstract:

This white paper examines the principles of sustainable technology as applied to the Intel i5-4690, a fourth-generation processor released in 2014. While newer processors offer improved performance and energy efficiency, a large number of i5-4690 systems remain in use. This paper argues that responsible management and optimization can significantly extend the lifespan of these systems, reducing e-waste and minimizing environmental impact. A hypothetical case study illustrates the practical application and benefits of these sustainable practices.

1. Introduction:

The rapid pace of technological advancement often leads to the premature obsolescence of hardware. While upgrading to the latest technology can offer benefits, it also contributes to the growing problem of electronic waste (e-waste) and increased energy consumption associated with manufacturing new devices. This paper explores how sustainable practices can be implemented to maximize the utility of existing i5-4690 systems, balancing performance needs with environmental responsibility.

2. The i5-4690 in Context:

The Intel i5-4690, while a capable processor in its time, is now considered a legacy product. Its 22nm manufacturing process is less energy-efficient than newer CPUs built on smaller nanometer processes. However, for many everyday tasks, the i5-4690 still provides sufficient performance. A significant number of these systems remain in operation, particularly in small businesses, educational institutions, and among individual users.

3. Principles of Sustainable Technology for i5-4690 Systems:

Sustainable technology applied to the i5-4690 focuses on maximizing its useful life and minimizing its environmental footprint. This involves several key strategies:

  • 3.1 System Optimization:
    • Storage Upgrade: Replacing traditional hard drives (HDDs) with Solid State Drives (SSDs) significantly improves system responsiveness, reducing CPU idle time and overall energy consumption.
    • Memory Management: Ensuring adequate RAM minimizes reliance on virtual memory, which can strain the CPU and increase power usage.
    • Cooling Optimization: Maintaining proper airflow, cleaning fans, and reapplying thermal paste can improve heat dissipation, enhancing performance and prolonging the CPU’s lifespan.
  • 3.2 Software Efficiency:
    • Lightweight Applications: Utilizing software optimized for performance reduces the load on the CPU, saving energy.
    • Software Updates: Keeping operating systems and applications updated often includes performance enhancements and bug fixes that contribute to efficiency.
  • 3.3 Power Management:
    • Power Settings: Employing power plans that balance performance and energy consumption (e.g., “Balanced” or “Power Saver”) can reduce energy waste.
    • Peripheral Management: Disconnecting or powering down unused peripherals minimizes overall system power draw.
  • 3.4 Responsible Disposal:
    • E-waste Recycling: When upgrading becomes necessary, responsible recycling of the entire system is crucial to prevent hazardous materials from entering the environment.

4. Case Study: Green Tech Solutions:

[The case study outlined in the previous response would be inserted here, detailing how a hypothetical company implemented the above principles and the positive outcomes they achieved.]

5. Discussion:

The case study demonstrates that a holistic approach to sustainable technology can yield significant benefits, even with older hardware. By focusing on system optimization, software efficiency, power management, and responsible disposal, organizations and individuals can extend the lifespan of their i5-4690 systems, reduce energy consumption, and minimize their environmental impact.

6. Conclusion:

While newer processors offer undeniable advantages, the principles of sustainable technology emphasize responsible use of existing resources. By implementing the strategies outlined in this paper, users of i5-4690 systems can contribute to a more sustainable technology ecosystem, reducing e-waste and minimizing the environmental footprint of computing. This approach highlights the importance of considering the entire system lifecycle and user behavior when addressing the challenge of sustainable technology.

7. Further Research:

Future research could explore the long-term cost benefits of sustainable practices for legacy hardware and investigate the potential for developing specialized software tools to optimize performance and energy efficiency on older systems. Additionally, studies examining user behavior and its impact on hardware lifespan and energy consumption would be valuable.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

While the i5-4690 isn’t ideal for cutting-edge industrial applications due to its age, it can still be relevant in specific, less demanding industrial settings where cost-effectiveness and maximizing existing equipment are priorities. Here are some potential industrial applications where sustainable practices related to the i5-4690 could be considered:

  • Legacy Control Systems: Some older industrial control systems (PLCs, HMIs) might still rely on computers with processors like the i5-4690. Upgrading these systems can be expensive and disruptive. Sustainable practices like optimizing software, ensuring proper cooling, and upgrading storage to SSDs could extend the life of these legacy systems until a full upgrade is feasible. Important Note: Reliability is paramount in industrial control. Any modifications must be thoroughly tested and validated to avoid production disruptions.
  • Data Acquisition and Monitoring: In less critical data acquisition or monitoring applications where real-time performance isn’t paramount, i5-4690 systems might still be suitable. For example, monitoring environmental conditions in a warehouse or collecting sensor data at regular intervals. Here, energy efficiency and maximizing the lifespan of existing equipment are beneficial.
  • Basic Automation Tasks: For simple automation tasks that don’t require high processing power, i5-4690 systems could be repurposed. Examples include controlling simple machinery or managing basic assembly line processes.
  • Testing and Diagnostics: In some industrial testing or diagnostic applications, older hardware might be sufficient. For example, running basic diagnostic software on equipment or performing routine tests.
  • Human-Machine Interface (HMI) for non-critical systems: For HMIs used in less critical applications, an i5-4690 could still function. Think of displaying information or allowing operators to input basic commands in a non-time-sensitive environment.

Key Considerations for Industrial Applications:

  • Reliability: Industrial environments demand high reliability. Any modifications or upgrades must be thoroughly tested to avoid downtime.
  • Safety: Safety is paramount. Changes to control systems must not compromise safety protocols.
  • Longevity: Extending the lifespan of existing hardware is important, but a plan for eventual replacement should be in place.
  • Support: Ensure that any software or hardware used with the i5-4690 is still supported or has a clear upgrade path.
  • Security: Industrial systems can be targets for cyberattacks. Security must be carefully considered when using older hardware.

Sustainable Practices in Industrial Settings:

  • Virtualization: Where appropriate, virtualization can consolidate multiple less demanding tasks onto a single i5-4690 system, reducing the number of physical machines needed.
  • Power Management: Implementing power-saving settings where possible can reduce energy consumption.
  • Proper Cooling: Maintaining proper cooling in industrial environments is crucial for the longevity of hardware.
  • Responsible Disposal: When equipment is eventually decommissioned, it must be recycled responsibly.

Important Caveat: While sustainable practices can extend the life of i5-4690 systems in specific industrial scenarios, it’s crucial to recognize their limitations. For demanding, mission-critical applications, modern industrial-grade hardware is essential. The focus should be on using existing equipment responsibly while planning for future upgrades to more efficient and reliable technologies.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4690 ?

It’s great you’re thinking about research and development (R&D) in the context of sustainable technology for an older CPU like the i5-4690! While it might seem counterintuitive to invest heavily in R&D for a legacy processor, there are some interesting areas to explore:

1. Optimization and Efficiency:

  • Advanced Power Management: Research could focus on developing more granular power management techniques specifically tailored for the i5-4690. This could involve:
    • Dynamic Frequency Scaling: Fine-tuning how the CPU adjusts its clock speed based on workload demands to minimize energy waste.
    • Voltage Optimization: Exploring ways to dynamically adjust voltage levels to reduce power consumption without sacrificing performance.
  • Software Optimization:
    • Compiler Optimizations: Developing compiler tools that can generate code specifically optimized for the i5-4690’s architecture to improve performance-per-watt.
    • Lightweight Operating Systems: Investigating the use of lightweight operating systems or customized Linux distributions designed to run efficiently on older hardware.

2. Repurposing and Reuse:

  • Legacy System Integration: Research could explore ways to seamlessly integrate i5-4690 systems into modern industrial or commercial environments. This might involve:
    • Developing compatibility layers: To bridge the gap between older hardware and newer software or communication protocols.
    • Creating specialized hardware interfaces: To connect i5-4690 systems to modern sensors, actuators, or other devices.
  • Refurbishment and Reuse:
    • Developing standardized testing procedures: To efficiently assess the condition of i5-4690 systems for reuse in refurbished computers.
    • Creating educational programs: To train technicians in the repair and refurbishment of older hardware.

3. E-waste Reduction:

  • Material Recovery: Research could focus on improving the processes for recovering valuable materials from i5-4690 systems and other electronic waste.
  • Design for Disassembly: Exploring how future hardware could be designed with easier disassembly in mind to facilitate recycling and material recovery.

4. Educational and Awareness Initiatives:

  • Developing educational resources: To raise awareness about the importance of sustainable technology practices for older hardware.
  • Creating online platforms: To share best practices and resources for extending the life of legacy systems.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Limited Resources: Funding for R&D focused on older hardware might be limited.
  • Market Demand: The market for solutions specifically targeting the i5-4690 might be small.
  • Technological Limitations: There might be inherent limitations to how much efficiency can be improved on older architectures.

Potential Benefits:

  • Reduced E-waste: Extending the life of i5-4690 systems can contribute to reducing electronic waste.
  • Energy Savings: Optimizing power consumption can lead to lower electricity bills and a smaller carbon footprint.
  • Cost Savings: Repurposing and reusing older hardware can save money for individuals and organizations.
  • Knowledge Sharing: Research in this area can generate valuable insights into sustainable technology practices for a wider range of hardware.

While large-scale R&D efforts focused solely on the i5-4690 might be unlikely, smaller projects or initiatives within academic institutions or non-profit organizations could yield valuable results and contribute to a more sustainable approach to technology.

COURTESY : TURILYTIX

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.

Recommended HashTags

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »