Sustainable Technology of 2270

Leave a Comment / Sustainable Technology of 2270 / By
79 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

While it’s impossible to definitively say what sustainable technology will look like in 2270, we can speculate based on current trends and potential advancements:

Possible Trends:

  • Energy:
    • Fusion power: If achieved, it could provide clean, abundant energy.  
    • Advanced solar: Highly efficient solar panels, perhaps integrated into infrastructure.
    • Space-based solar: Collecting solar energy in space and beaming it down.  
  • Materials:
    • Biomanufacturing: Growing materials with specific properties using biological processes.
    • Self-healing materials: Materials that can repair themselves, extending lifespan.  
    • Recycling technologies: Highly efficient systems for recovering and reusing materials.
  • Environment:
    • Carbon capture: Advanced technologies to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.
    • Geoengineering: Methods to counteract climate change, though potentially controversial.  
    • Ecosystem restoration: Technologies to repair and protect natural ecosystems.
  • Technology:
    • Artificial intelligence: AI optimizing energy use, resource management, and more.  
    • Nanotechnology: Creating materials and devices at the atomic level, with diverse applications.  
    • Biotechnology: Engineering biological systems for various purposes, including sustainability.  

Important Considerations:

  • Ethical implications: New technologies must be developed and used responsibly.
  • Social equity: Sustainable solutions should benefit everyone, not just the wealthy.
  • Unforeseen consequences: New technologies can have unintended impacts that must be considered.

It’s important to remember that this is just speculation. The future of sustainable technology is uncertain, but it’s likely to be driven by innovation, collaboration, and a commitment to protecting our planet.

What is Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

It’s exciting to think about what sustainable technology might look like in 2270! While we can’t predict the future with certainty, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and potential breakthroughs. Here are some possibilities:

Energy:

  • Fusion Power: If humanity manages to harness fusion power, it could become the primary source of clean and abundant energy. Fusion reactors would essentially mimic the energy production of the sun, providing a virtually limitless supply of power.  
  • Advanced Solar Technology: Solar panels might become incredibly efficient, perhaps even integrated into buildings and infrastructure. Imagine entire cities covered in solar “skin” that seamlessly generates power.
  • Space-Based Solar Power: Perhaps we’ll have orbiting solar power stations that collect sunlight in space and beam it down to Earth. This could provide a continuous and reliable source of energy, unaffected by weather or nighttime.

Materials:

  • Biomanufacturing: We might be able to “grow” materials with specific properties using biological processes. Imagine buildings made from trees engineered to have the strength of steel or plastics that decompose naturally.
  • Self-Healing Materials: Materials that can repair themselves could become commonplace, extending the lifespan of everything from buildings to clothing. This would significantly reduce waste and the need for constant replacements.  
  • Advanced Recycling Technologies: We might have incredibly efficient recycling systems that can recover and reuse almost all materials, creating a truly circular economy.

Environment:

  • Carbon Capture and Storage: Technologies to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere could become highly advanced, helping to reverse the effects of climate change.
  • Geoengineering: Methods to deliberately alter the Earth’s climate system, such as solar radiation management, might be used to counteract global warming, though these would likely be controversial.  
  • Ecosystem Restoration: We might have developed sophisticated technologies to repair and protect natural ecosystems, such as coral reefs or rainforests.

Technology:

  • Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI could play a crucial role in optimizing energy use, resource management, and many other aspects of sustainability. Imagine AI-powered systems that can predict and prevent environmental disasters.  
  • Nanotechnology: The ability to manipulate matter at the atomic level could lead to incredible advancements in materials science, energy storage, and environmental remediation.
  • Biotechnology: Engineering biological systems could provide solutions for everything from producing biofuels to cleaning up pollution.  

Important Considerations:

  • Ethical Implications: As we develop these technologies, it will be crucial to consider their ethical implications and ensure they are used responsibly.
  • Social Equity: Sustainable solutions should benefit everyone, not just the wealthy. We need to ensure that these advancements are used to create a more just and equitable world.
  • Unforeseen Consequences: New technologies can have unintended consequences, so it’s important to carefully consider the potential impacts before widespread adoption.  

It’s important to remember that this is just speculation. The future of sustainable technology is uncertain, but it’s likely to be driven by innovation, collaboration, and a deep commitment to protecting our planet for future generations.Sources and related content

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

It’s interesting to think about who would be driving the need for sustainable technology in 2270! Here are some key players:

  • Everyone! By 2270, the effects of climate change and resource depletion might be even more pronounced. Sustainable technology would be essential for everyone to have access to basic necessities like clean energy, food, and water.
  • Governments and International Organizations: They would likely play a crucial role in setting policies, funding research, and ensuring that sustainable technologies are implemented on a large scale.
  • Scientists and Engineers: They would be at the forefront of developing new sustainable technologies, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible.
  • Businesses: Companies would need to adopt sustainable practices to remain competitive and meet consumer demand for eco-friendly products and services.  
  • Communities and Individuals: People would need to embrace sustainable lifestyles, making conscious choices about their consumption and supporting businesses that prioritize sustainability.

Essentially, the need for sustainable technology in 2270 would be driven by a collective understanding that it’s essential for the survival and well-being of humanity and the planet. It would require a global effort, with everyone playing a part in creating a more sustainable future.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 2270 wouldn’t suddenly appear out of nowhere. It would be the result of a long process, driven by several factors:

  • Continuing Environmental Degradation: Even with current efforts, the effects of climate change, pollution, and resource depletion are likely to worsen over time. By 2270, these problems could be severe, making sustainable technology absolutely essential for survival.
  • Population Growth: If the global population continues to grow, the demand for resources like energy, food, and water will increase, putting even more strain on the planet. Sustainable technology would be needed to meet these needs without further damaging the environment.  
  • Technological Advancement: As technology continues to advance, we may develop a deeper understanding of our impact on the planet and find new ways to mitigate it. This could lead to the development of even more sophisticated sustainable technologies.
  • Shifting Values: Over time, there could be a shift in societal values, with a greater emphasis on environmental protection and sustainability. This could create a demand for sustainable technologies and drive their development.

Essentially, the need for sustainable technology in 2270 would be the culmination of current trends and challenges. It would be a response to the growing recognition that we need to find a way to live in harmony with the planet if we want to ensure a future for humanity.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

The need for sustainable technology in 2270 wouldn’t be confined to a single location. It would be a global imperative, touching every part of the planet. However, some areas might have a more acute need or be particularly important for implementing these technologies:

  • Urban Centers: Cities are major consumers of resources and producers of waste. Sustainable technologies would be crucial for making cities more livable and environmentally friendly, from energy-efficient buildings to advanced waste management systems.  
  • Developing Nations: These regions may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change and resource scarcity. Sustainable technologies could help them develop in a way that minimizes environmental impact and improves quality of life.
  • Remote and Isolated Communities: Sustainable technologies could provide access to clean energy, clean water, and other essential resources in areas that are not connected to traditional infrastructure.  
  • Areas with Scarce Resources: Regions facing water shortages, for example, would heavily rely on sustainable technologies for water purification, conservation, and potentially even water generation.
  • Vulnerable Ecosystems: Areas like rainforests, coral reefs, and polar regions are particularly sensitive to environmental changes. Sustainable technologies would be needed to protect and restore these vital ecosystems.  

Essentially, the need for sustainable technology in 2270 would be universal, but its specific application would vary depending on the unique challenges and opportunities of different regions. It would be a global effort, with every part of the world playing a role in creating a more sustainable future.Sources and related content

How is required Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

That’s a great question! It’s not just about what sustainable technology will exist in 2270, but how it will be needed and used. Here are some key ways:

  • Integrated Systems: Sustainable technologies in 2270 will likely be highly integrated, working together seamlessly. Imagine smart grids that optimize energy distribution based on real-time demand, or buildings that automatically adjust their energy use based on weather conditions and occupancy.
  • Localized Solutions: While some technologies might be global (like space-based solar power), many sustainable solutions will be tailored to specific local needs and environments. This could mean using locally sourced biomaterials for construction or developing water purification systems that are adapted to the specific contaminants in a region.  
  • Circular Economy: By 2270, the concept of a circular economy will likely be deeply ingrained. Sustainable technologies will be essential for closing the loop on resource use, ensuring that materials are reused, recycled, and repurposed rather than ending up as waste.  
  • Autonomous Systems: AI and robotics will likely play a significant role in managing sustainable systems. Imagine AI-powered systems that can monitor and optimize energy grids, or robots that can repair and maintain infrastructure with minimal human intervention.  
  • Decentralized Production: Sustainable technologies could enable more decentralized production of essential resources like energy and food. This could make communities more resilient and less reliant on centralized systems.

Essentially, sustainable technology in 2270 will be less about individual gadgets and more about creating interconnected systems that support a thriving and resilient society. It will be about using technology to live in harmony with the planet, ensuring that future generations have access to the resources they need.Sources and related content

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

It’s tough to do a traditional “case study” for something that far in the future, but we can create a plausible scenario based on current trends and potential advancements. Let’s imagine a case study of a coastal city in the year 2270:

Case Study: The Resilient Coast of ‘Aethelred’

Background:

  • By 2270, rising sea levels have significantly reshaped coastlines. Many cities have been abandoned, but Aethelred has adapted and thrived.
  • The city is built on a network of interconnected artificial islands and floating platforms, designed to rise and fall with the tides.
  • Aethelred is a hub for marine research and sustainable technology development.

Sustainable Technologies in Action:

  • Energy: Aethelred is powered by a combination of:
    • Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC): Utilizing the temperature difference between surface and deep ocean water to generate electricity.  
    • Wave and Tidal Energy: Harnessing the power of the ocean’s movements.
    • Advanced Solar: Highly efficient solar panels integrated into buildings and infrastructure.
  • Water:
    • Desalination: Advanced and energy-efficient desalination plants provide fresh water.
    • Atmospheric Water Generation: Extracting water from the air using specialized technology.  
    • Water Recycling: Highly efficient systems for treating and reusing wastewater.
  • Food:
    • Vertical Farming: Multi-level farms within the city, utilizing hydroponics and aeroponics to grow crops efficiently.
    • Aquaculture: Sustainable fish farming in the surrounding ocean.
    • Lab-grown Meat: Cultivated protein sources to supplement traditional agriculture.
  • Transportation:
    • Autonomous Electric Vehicles: A network of self-driving electric vehicles provides transportation within the city.
    • Underwater Tunnels: Submerged tunnels connect the islands and platforms.
    • High-speed Maglev Trains: Connecting Aethelred to inland cities.
  • Waste Management:
    • Advanced Recycling: Nearly all materials are recycled or repurposed.
    • Biowaste Conversion: Organic waste is converted into energy or fertilizer.
    • Minimal Landfill: Landfills are a thing of the past.

Challenges and Solutions:

  • Initial Investment: Implementing these technologies required significant upfront investment. This was overcome through international collaboration and long-term planning.
  • Maintenance: Maintaining complex systems requires skilled workers and ongoing research. Aethelred has prioritized education and training in sustainable technology fields.
  • Environmental Impact: Even sustainable technologies can have unintended consequences. Aethelred has a dedicated team of scientists monitoring the environment and adapting their systems as needed.

Outcomes:

  • Resilience: Aethelred is able to withstand rising sea levels and extreme weather events.
  • Self-Sufficiency: The city is largely self-sufficient in terms of energy, water, and food.
  • Environmental Protection: Aethelred has a minimal environmental footprint and is actively working to restore the surrounding marine ecosystem.
  • Economic Prosperity: Aethelred is a thriving center for innovation and sustainable technology, attracting talent and investment from around the world.

Lessons Learned:

  • Proactive Adaptation: Adapting to climate change requires proactive planning and investment in sustainable technologies.
  • Collaboration: International cooperation is essential for addressing global challenges.
  • Continuous Innovation: Ongoing research and development are crucial for improving sustainable technologies and addressing new challenges.

This case study illustrates how a combination of advanced technologies, careful planning, and a commitment to sustainability can enable a city to thrive in the face of environmental challenges. It provides a glimpse into a possible future where humanity has learned to live in harmony with the planet.

COURTESY : Michigan Engineering

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 2270: A Vision for a Thriving Future

Executive Summary:

This white paper explores the potential landscape of sustainable technology in the year 2270, recognizing that predicting the future with certainty is impossible. It builds upon current trends, scientific projections, and societal shifts to envision a world where humanity has achieved a harmonious balance with the planet, driven by advanced and integrated sustainable solutions. This vision emphasizes not only technological advancements but also the crucial role of ethical considerations, social equity, and global collaboration.

1. Introduction: The Imperative for Sustainability

The challenges of the 21st century, including climate change, resource depletion, and biodiversity loss, will likely intensify in the coming centuries. By 2270, sustainable technology will be not just desirable, but essential for human survival and well-being. This paper argues that a proactive and holistic approach, combining technological innovation with societal transformation, is crucial to achieving a sustainable future.

2. Envisioning Sustainable Technologies in 2270:

This section outlines potential technological advancements across key sectors:

  • Energy: Fusion power, if realized, could provide clean, abundant energy. Advanced solar technologies, potentially including space-based solar farms, will likely play a significant role. Microgrids and smart energy management systems will optimize energy distribution and minimize waste.  
  • Materials: Biomanufacturing, creating materials through biological processes, could revolutionize industries. Self-healing materials will extend the lifespan of infrastructure and products. Advanced recycling technologies will enable a truly circular economy, minimizing waste and maximizing resource reuse.  
  • Environment: Carbon capture and storage technologies will be vital for mitigating climate change. Geoengineering techniques, while potentially controversial, may be employed to manage global climate. Ecosystem restoration technologies will help repair damaged ecosystems and preserve biodiversity.  
  • Food and Agriculture: Vertical farming, precision agriculture, and lab-grown meat will enhance food production efficiency and reduce environmental impact. Advanced desalination and water purification technologies will ensure access to clean water.
  • Information and Communication Technologies (ICT): AI and machine learning will play a critical role in optimizing resource management, predicting environmental changes, and automating sustainable systems. Nanotechnology could enable breakthroughs in energy storage, materials science, and environmental remediation.  
  • Transportation: Electric and autonomous vehicles will be ubiquitous. Advanced transportation systems, potentially including maglev trains and even personal air mobility, will prioritize efficiency and sustainability.

3. The Interconnected Web of Sustainability:

In 2270, sustainable technologies will not exist in isolation. They will be integrated into complex systems, working together to create resilient and sustainable communities. Smart cities, powered by interconnected grids and managed by AI, will optimize resource use and minimize environmental impact. Global networks will facilitate the sharing of knowledge and resources, fostering collaboration and accelerating the development of sustainable solutions.  

4. The Human Element: Society and Sustainability:

Technology alone is not enough. Achieving a sustainable future requires societal transformation:

  • Ethical Considerations: The development and deployment of new technologies must be guided by ethical principles, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability.  
  • Social Equity: Sustainable solutions must benefit all of humanity, not just a privileged few. Addressing inequalities and ensuring access to essential resources for everyone is crucial.
  • Global Collaboration: International cooperation is essential for tackling global challenges like climate change and resource depletion. Sharing knowledge, resources, and best practices will accelerate progress towards sustainability.  
  • Education and Awareness: Educating future generations about sustainability and empowering them to make informed choices is crucial for long-term success.

5. Challenges and Opportunities:

The path to a sustainable future in 2270 will not be without its challenges:

  • Technological Hurdles: Significant scientific and engineering breakthroughs will be needed to realize the full potential of sustainable technologies.
  • Economic Considerations: Investing in sustainable infrastructure and technologies will require significant financial resources.  
  • Political and Social Barriers: Overcoming political inertia and fostering public support for sustainable policies will be essential.
  • Unforeseen Consequences: New technologies can have unintended consequences, highlighting the need for careful planning and risk assessment.  

Despite these challenges, the opportunities are immense. A sustainable future offers the potential for a healthier planet, a more equitable society, and a thriving global economy.

6. Conclusion: A Call for Action:

This white paper presents a vision of a sustainable future in 2270. While the specific technologies and challenges may be uncertain, the imperative for sustainability is clear. By embracing innovation, fostering collaboration, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can create a world where humanity and nature thrive together. The journey towards 2270 begins today. We must act now to lay the foundation for a sustainable future for all.Sources and related content

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

It’s fascinating to imagine the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 2270! Here are some potential scenarios, building on the trends we’ve discussed:

1. Biomanufacturing and Advanced Materials:

  • “Growing” Products: Imagine factories that don’t assemble parts, but rather cultivate them. Biomanufacturing could allow us to grow materials with specific properties, like super-strong composites or biodegradable plastics, directly from biological processes. This could revolutionize manufacturing, reducing waste and energy consumption.  
  • Self-Healing Infrastructure: Bridges, buildings, and even vehicles could be made from self-healing materials. If damage occurs, the material would automatically repair itself, extending lifespan and reducing maintenance costs. This would be particularly useful in harsh environments or for infrastructure that is difficult to access.  
  • Personalized Production: Biomanufacturing could also enable highly personalized production. Imagine “growing” a chair that perfectly fits your body or clothes that are tailored to your exact measurements, all with minimal waste and environmental impact.

2. Circular Economy and Resource Management:

  • Zero-Waste Factories: Factories in 2270 might operate on a closed-loop system, where all materials are continuously recycled and reused. Advanced recycling technologies would be able to break down complex products into their constituent components and repurpose them for new products.  
  • Resource Recovery: Mining might become a thing of the past. Instead, we might have “urban mining” facilities that extract valuable materials from waste streams, old products, and even contaminated sites. This would reduce our reliance on virgin resources and minimize environmental damage.  
  • Localized Production: Decentralized manufacturing facilities, powered by renewable energy and using locally sourced materials, could become more common. This would reduce transportation costs and the environmental impact of long supply chains.  

3. Energy and Automation:

  • AI-Powered Optimization: AI systems could manage entire industrial processes, optimizing energy use, minimizing waste, and predicting potential problems. Imagine a factory where AI controls everything from the flow of materials to the temperature of the production line, ensuring maximum efficiency and sustainability.  
  • Renewable Energy Integration: Industries would be powered by a mix of renewable energy sources, seamlessly integrated through smart grids. Factories might have their own on-site renewable energy generation facilities, such as solar panels or small-scale fusion reactors.
  • Robotic Automation: Robots would likely play a major role in manufacturing, performing tasks that are dangerous, repetitive, or require high precision. Advanced robots could be designed to work alongside humans, collaborating to improve efficiency and safety.  

4. Environmental Remediation and Monitoring:

  • Pollution Cleanup: Industries might use advanced technologies to clean up existing pollution and prevent future contamination. This could involve using nanomaterials to absorb pollutants or bioremediation techniques to break down harmful substances.
  • Environmental Monitoring: Sophisticated sensor networks and AI systems could constantly monitor environmental conditions, providing real-time data on air and water quality, resource levels, and ecosystem health. This would allow industries to proactively address potential problems and minimize their environmental impact.  

5. Space-Based Industries:

  • Off-World Manufacturing: In 2270, some industries might have moved beyond Earth. Space-based manufacturing facilities could utilize resources from asteroids or the Moon to produce materials and products, reducing the environmental impact of mining and transportation on Earth.
  • Space-Based Solar Power: Industries could benefit from the abundant and continuous solar energy available in space. Space-based solar farms could beam energy down to Earth, providing a clean and reliable power source for manufacturing processes.  

These are just a few examples of how sustainable technology could revolutionize industry in 2270. The key themes are likely to be:

  • Resource Efficiency: Minimizing waste and maximizing the use of resources.
  • Renewable Energy: Transitioning to clean and sustainable energy sources.
  • Environmental Protection: Reducing pollution and restoring damaged ecosystems.
  • Technological Integration: Combining advanced technologies like AI, nanotechnology, and biotechnology to create sustainable solutions.

By embracing these principles, industries in 2270 could play a crucial role in creating a thriving and sustainable future for humanity.Sources and related content

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 2270 ?

It’s exciting to think about the research and development that would be driving sustainable technology in 2270! Here are some key areas of focus:

1. Fundamental Science:

  • New Energy Sources: Research into fusion energy would continue to be a top priority, with the goal of achieving stable and efficient fusion reactors. Scientists might also be exploring other potential energy sources, such as zero-point energy or antimatter.
  • Advanced Materials: Materials science would be pushing the boundaries of what’s possible, with research into new types of biomaterials, self-healing materials, and materials with unique properties like superconductivity or extreme strength.
  • Understanding Complex Systems: Researchers would be studying complex systems like the Earth’s climate, ecosystems, and human societies to better understand how they function and how to maintain their stability.  

2. Technological Development:

  • Artificial Intelligence: AI research would focus on developing more sophisticated AI systems that can learn, adapt, and solve complex problems. This could lead to AI that can manage entire cities, optimize energy grids, or even design new sustainable technologies.
  • Nanotechnology: Nanotechnology research would be exploring new ways to manipulate matter at the atomic level, with potential applications in energy storage, materials science, and environmental remediation.  
  • Biotechnology: Biotechnology research would be focused on engineering biological systems for various purposes, such as producing biofuels, cleaning up pollution, or even growing new organs for transplantation.

3. Interdisciplinary Collaboration:

  • Systems Thinking: Researchers would be working across disciplines to develop a better understanding of how different systems interact with each other. This would be crucial for creating sustainable solutions that don’t have unintended consequences.
  • Global Collaboration: International collaboration would be essential for sharing knowledge, resources, and expertise. Scientists and engineers from around the world would be working together to solve global challenges.
  • Ethical Considerations: Research would also be focused on the ethical implications of new technologies. Scientists and ethicists would be working together to ensure that new technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all humanity.

4. Experimental Platforms:

  • Living Laboratories: Cities and communities could serve as “living laboratories” for testing new sustainable technologies. This would allow researchers to gather real-world data and refine their designs.
  • Simulation and Modeling: Advanced computer simulations would be used to model complex systems and predict the potential impacts of new technologies. This would help researchers to identify potential problems and optimize their designs before they are deployed.  
  • Space-Based Research: Space could become an important platform for research on sustainable technologies. For example, scientists might conduct experiments on space-based solar power or test new materials in the harsh environment of space.

5. Education and Training:

  • Interdisciplinary Education: Future scientists and engineers would receive interdisciplinary education that prepares them to work across different fields. This would be essential for developing holistic solutions to complex problems.  
  • Lifelong Learning: The rapid pace of technological change would require lifelong learning. Scientists and engineers would need to constantly update their skills and knowledge to stay at the forefront of their fields.
  • Public Engagement: Engaging the public in the research process would be crucial for building support for sustainable technologies. Scientists would need to communicate their findings in a clear and accessible way, and the public would need to be involved in decision-making about the future of technology.

In summary, the research and development of sustainable technology in 2270 would be a global, interdisciplinary effort, driven by a deep commitment to creating a thriving and sustainable future for all. It would involve pushing the boundaries of science and technology, while also considering the ethical and social implications of new advancements.Sources and related content

COURTESY : Financial Times

References

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

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »