Sustainable Technology Of 3170

Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

The query “Sustainable Technology of 3170” is a bit ambiguous and could refer to a few different things. Here are a few interpretations and possible answers:

1. Sustainable Technology in the Year 3170:

It’s impossible to know what sustainable technology will look like in the year 3170. Predicting technology even a few decades out is challenging, let alone over a thousand years. However, we can speculate based on current trends:

Advanced Energy Sources: It’s likely that by 3170, humanity will have moved far beyond fossil fuels. Potential energy sources could include advanced solar, fusion, or even more exotic forms of energy that we can’t yet imagine.
Closed-Loop Systems: Sustainable technologies will likely focus on closed-loop systems where resources are continuously recycled and reused, minimizing waste and environmental impact.
Biotechnology: Advances in biotechnology could lead to the development of materials and processes that are entirely biodegradable and integrate seamlessly with natural ecosystems.
Space-Based Resources: By 3170, space-based resources may be more readily available, potentially reducing the strain on Earth’s resources.

2. Specific Product or Technology Named “3170”:

There might be a specific product or technology with the designation “3170” that is related to sustainability. Without more context, it’s impossible to identify what this might be.

3. Course or Program Code:

“3170” could be a course or program code related to sustainable technology at a specific institution. Again, without more context, it’s impossible to provide specific information.

To get a more accurate answer, please provide more context about what you are looking for.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

Predicting the exact nature of sustainable technology in the year 3170 is, of course, impossible. However, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and the direction technology seems to be heading. Here are some potential aspects of sustainable technology in 3170:

Energy:
- Advanced Renewable Sources: It’s highly probable that by 3170, humanity will have fully transitioned away from fossil fuels. We might see highly efficient solar energy capture, fusion power, geothermal energy, or even more exotic energy sources that we can’t yet imagine.
- Decentralized Energy Grids: Energy generation and distribution might be highly localized and decentralized, with smart grids that optimize energy use and minimize waste.
- Energy Storage: Advanced energy storage solutions will be crucial to balance energy supply and demand, especially with intermittent renewable sources.
Resource Management:
- Closed-Loop Systems: Sustainable technologies will likely focus on closed-loop systems where resources are continuously recycled and reused, minimizing waste and environmental impact.
- Material Science: Advanced materials science could lead to the development of biodegradable, self-healing, and highly durable materials that minimize resource depletion.
- Resource Extraction: Space-based resource extraction might become more feasible, reducing the strain on Earth’s resources.
Environment:
- Ecosystem Restoration: Technologies for large-scale ecosystem restoration and environmental remediation could be developed to repair past damage and protect biodiversity.
- Climate Engineering: Advanced climate engineering technologies might be used to mitigate climate change and manage the Earth’s climate.
- Pollution Control: Highly effective pollution control technologies will likely be in place to prevent and remediate environmental contamination.
Technology and Society:
- Artificial Intelligence: AI could play a crucial role in optimizing resource use, managing energy systems, and developing new sustainable technologies.
- Biotechnology: Advances in biotechnology could lead to the development of materials and processes that are entirely biodegradable and integrate seamlessly with natural ecosystems.
- Sustainable Cities: Urban planning and development will likely focus on creating sustainable and resilient cities that minimize environmental impact and maximize quality of life.

It’s important to remember that these are just speculations. The actual nature of sustainable technology in 3170 could be very different. However, the underlying principles of sustainability – minimizing environmental impact, conserving resources, and promoting social well-being – will likely remain central to technological development in the centuries to come.Sources and related content

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

It’s tricky to answer “who” will require sustainable technology in 3170 because the very concept of “requirement” might be different then. However, we can think about it in terms of needs and drivers:

Humanity as a whole: This is the most obvious answer. By 3170, if humanity still exists, it will need sustainable technology to survive. Resource depletion, climate change, and pollution will likely have forced a complete shift away from unsustainable practices.
Ecosystems: In 3170, the health and survival of Earth’s ecosystems will be deeply intertwined with sustainable technology. Technologies that help restore, protect, and maintain biodiversity will be essential.
Future Generations: Those living in 3170 and beyond will inherit the consequences of our actions (or inaction) today. They will require sustainable technology to thrive in a world that may be significantly altered.
Other Species: While we often focus on human needs, sustainable technology in 3170 will ideally consider the needs of all living things. Technologies that minimize human impact on other species and their habitats will be crucial.

Thinking beyond “requirement”:

Perhaps a better way to think about it is who will be driving the development and use of sustainable technology in 3170. This could include:

Scientists and Engineers: They will be at the forefront of developing new sustainable technologies, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible.
Innovators and Entrepreneurs: They will play a key role in bringing sustainable technologies to market and making them accessible to all.
Governments and Organizations: They will need to create policies and incentives that support the development and adoption of sustainable technologies.
Individuals: Ultimately, it will be up to individuals to embrace sustainable practices in their daily lives and demand sustainable solutions from businesses and governments.

In essence, sustainable technology in 3170 will be something that is not just required, but deeply integrated into all aspects of life, driven by a collective understanding of its importance for the well-being of humanity and the planet.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

While we can’t pinpoint an exact date for when sustainable technology will be required in 3170, we can talk about the timeline leading up to that point:

Now: The need for sustainable technology is urgent. We are already facing the consequences of climate change, resource depletion, and pollution. The sooner we develop and implement sustainable solutions, the better.
Near Future: Over the next few decades, we will likely see a rapid acceleration in the development and adoption of sustainable technologies. This will be driven by increasing environmental pressures, technological advancements, and growing public awareness.
Mid-Term Future: In the coming centuries, sustainable technology will likely become the dominant paradigm. As resources become scarcer and environmental challenges intensify, unsustainable practices will become increasingly impractical and costly.
Long-Term Future (3170 and beyond): By 3170, it’s likely that sustainable technology will be absolutely essential for human survival and the health of the planet. It will be deeply integrated into all aspects of life, and the concept of “unsustainable technology” may be a distant memory.

Important Note: It’s crucial to understand that the “when” of sustainable technology is not a fixed point in the future. It’s an ongoing process that starts now and continues indefinitely. The sooner we prioritize sustainability, the smoother the transition will be, and the better the future will be for those living in 3170 and beyond.

In essence, the best time to require sustainable technology was yesterday, the second best time is today.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

This is a fascinating question! It forces us to think about the scope of “where” in a very broad sense. Here are some ways to interpret where sustainable technology might be required in 3170:

Everywhere on Earth: This is the most straightforward answer. By 3170, sustainable technology will likely be essential in every corner of the globe, from bustling cities to remote villages. It will be needed for energyCOURTESY production, transportation, agriculture, manufacturing, and even basic survival.
Beyond Earth: As humanity potentially expands its presence in space, sustainable technology will be crucial for off-world settlements and resource utilization. This could include closed-loop life support systems, in-situ resource utilization (ISRU), and sustainable space travel.
In the Digital Realm: In 3170, the digital world might be even more integrated with our lives than it is today. Sustainable technology will be needed to power and maintain this digital infrastructure, including data centers, communication networks, and AI systems.
Within Ourselves: Sustainable technology might even extend to the human body itself. Advances in biotechnology could lead to technologies that enhance human health, extend lifespan, and even allow us to better adapt to changing environments.

Thinking beyond physical location:

Perhaps “where” also refers to the different aspects of life where sustainable technology will be required:

Economy: Sustainable technologies will drive economic growth and create new industries, ensuring a prosperous future.
Society: Sustainable practices will promote social equity, improve quality of life, and foster a sense of community.
Culture: Sustainability will likely become deeply ingrained in human culture, shaping our values, beliefs, and behaviors.

In essence, sustainable technology in 3170 will be required not just in specific locations, but in all aspects of human existence, both physical and abstract. It will be the foundation upon which society is built and the key to our long-term survival and well-being.Sources and related content

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

The “how” of sustainable technology in 3170 is a complex question, as it will likely involve a multifaceted approach. Here are some possibilities:

Integration: Sustainable technologies will likely be deeply integrated into every aspect of life, from the materials we use to the energy we consume. It won’t be a separate “thing” but rather the default way of doing things.
Innovation: Continuous innovation will be essential to develop new and more efficient sustainable technologies. This will require ongoing research and development in fields like materials science, energy, biotechnology, and artificial intelligence.
Adaptation: Sustainable technologies will need to be adaptable to changing environmental conditions and evolving human needs. Flexibility and resilience will be key.
Collaboration: Developing and implementing sustainable technologies will require global collaboration among scientists, engineers, policymakers, and individuals. Sharing knowledge and resources will be crucial.
Education: A deep understanding of sustainability principles will be essential for everyone in 3170. Education will play a vital role in fostering a culture of sustainability and empowering individuals to make informed choices.
Regulation: Policies and regulations will likely play a role in guiding the development and adoption of sustainable technologies, ensuring that they are used responsibly and ethically.
Behavior Change: Technological solutions alone won’t be enough. Sustainable technology in 3170 will require significant shifts in human behavior, including how we consume resources, interact with the environment, and live our lives.
Circular Economy: The concept of a circular economy, where resources are continuously reused and recycled, will likely be central to sustainable technology in 3170. This will require designing products and systems for durability, repairability, and recyclability.
Biomimicry: Learning from nature and mimicking natural processes could be a key approach to developing sustainable technologies. Nature has evolved highly efficient and resilient systems that we can learn from.

It’s important to remember that the “how” of sustainable technology in 3170 is not just about the technology itself, but also about the social, economic, and cultural context in which it is used. A truly sustainable future will require a holistic approach that integrates technology with human values and the needs of the planet.

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

It’s difficult to create a specific case study for sustainable technology in 3170, as it would be highly speculative. However, we can imagine a hypothetical scenario based on current trends and project what sustainable technology might look like in that era.

Case Study: The City of Aurora – 3170

Background:

By 3170, many coastal cities have been significantly impacted by rising sea levels. The city of Aurora, once a major coastal metropolis, has adapted by embracing sustainable technologies and urban planning.

Sustainable Technologies in Action:

Energy: Aurora is powered entirely by a network of advanced renewable energy sources. Highly efficient solar farms in the surrounding deserts provide the bulk of the city’s energy, supplemented by geothermal plants and even energy harvested from ocean currents. Smart grids optimize energy distribution and minimize waste.
Resource Management: Aurora operates on a closed-loop system. Waste is not discarded but treated as a valuable resource. Advanced recycling and upcycling technologies transform waste into new materials, reducing the need for resource extraction. Vertical farms and hydroponic gardens within the city provide fresh produce, minimizing transportation needs and land use.
Transportation: Personal vehicles are a thing of the past. Aurora’s residents travel on a network of high-speed, autonomous public transportation systems powered by electricity. These systems are integrated with the city’s infrastructure, optimizing traffic flow and minimizing energy consumption.
Environment: Aurora has integrated nature into its urban design. Green spaces, vertical gardens, and rooftop farms are prevalent throughout the city, improving air quality and providing habitats for wildlife. Advanced technologies are used to monitor and manage the city’s environment, ensuring its health and resilience.
Society: Aurora’s citizens are educated about sustainability and actively participate in maintaining the city’s ecological balance. The city fosters a culture of collaboration and innovation, constantly seeking new ways to improve sustainability and quality of life.

Challenges and Solutions:

Maintaining the balance: Ensuring a continuous supply of resources while minimizing environmental impact requires constant monitoring and adjustment. Aurora utilizes AI-powered systems to analyze data and optimize resource use.
Adapting to change: Climate change continues to impact the world in 3170. Aurora must be adaptable and resilient, able to adjust its infrastructure and technologies to changing conditions.
Social equity: Ensuring that all citizens have access to the benefits of sustainable technology is a key challenge. Aurora strives to create a just and equitable society where everyone can thrive.

Lessons Learned:

Long-term vision: Sustainable technology requires a long-term perspective. Aurora’s success is a result of planning and investment over centuries.
Holistic approach: Sustainability is not just about technology. It requires a holistic approach that integrates environmental, social, and economic considerations.
Continuous improvement: Sustainable technology is an ongoing process. Aurora is constantly seeking new ways to improve its sustainability performance.

Conclusion:

The city of Aurora in 3170 represents a potential future where sustainable technology is not just a necessity but a way of life. It demonstrates how human ingenuity, combined with a commitment to sustainability, can create a thriving and resilient society in harmony with the planet.

Important Note: This is a hypothetical case study. The actual nature of sustainable technology in 3170 could be very different. However, it highlights the importance of considering the long-term implications of our actions and investing in sustainable solutions today.

COURTESY : Sustain Life (now part of Workiva)

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3170 – A Speculative Exploration

Abstract:

Predicting the precise nature of sustainable technology in 3170 is an exercise in informed speculation. This white paper explores potential trajectories of technological development over the next millennium, focusing on key areas likely to be central to a sustainable future. It acknowledges the inherent uncertainties but aims to stimulate thought and discussion about the long-term challenges and opportunities facing humanity.

1. Introduction:

The imperative for sustainable technology is clear: to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. By 3170, the cumulative effects of climate change, resource depletion, and population growth will likely have necessitated a fundamental shift towards sustainable practices. This paper examines potential technological advancements across several key domains.

2. Energy:

Beyond Renewables: While solar, wind, and geothermal energy will likely still play a role, 3170 may see the widespread adoption of more advanced energy sources. Fusion power, perhaps refined to a highly efficient and compact form, could become a primary energy source. Exotic forms of energy generation, based on principles we may not yet fully understand, are also possibilities.
Decentralized and Smart Grids: Energy grids will likely be highly decentralized and intelligent, capable of dynamically balancing supply and demand. Nanotechnology could play a role in creating highly efficient energy storage solutions and transmission networks.
Space-Based Solar Power: The potential for harvesting solar energy in space and beaming it back to Earth could become a viable option, providing a virtually inexhaustible supply of clean energy.

3. Resource Management:

The Circular Economy: The concept of a circular economy, where resources are continuously reused and recycled, will be fully realized. Advanced materials science will produce highly durable, biodegradable, and easily recyclable materials.
Advanced Recycling and Upcycling: Technologies capable of breaking down complex materials into their constituent atoms and rebuilding them into new products will be commonplace. “Waste” as we know it today will be a thing of the past.
In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU): For off-world settlements and space exploration, ISRU will be critical. Technologies for extracting resources from asteroids, planets, and other celestial bodies will be highly developed.

4. Environment and Ecosystems:

Ecosystem Restoration: Technologies for large-scale ecosystem restoration and environmental remediation will be essential for repairing past damage and preserving biodiversity. Advanced biotechnology could be used to engineer organisms that can break down pollutants and restore degraded ecosystems.
Climate Engineering: While ideally preventative measures will have addressed the root causes of climate change, climate engineering technologies may be necessary to manage residual effects and stabilize the Earth’s climate.
Biodiversity Preservation: Advanced monitoring and tracking technologies will be used to protect endangered species and preserve biodiversity. Genetic engineering may even play a role in preserving genetic diversity.

5. Biotechnology and Nanotechnology:

Bio-Integrated Technology: Biotechnology will likely be deeply integrated with other technologies. We may see the development of bio-computers, self-healing materials, and even bio-engineered energy sources.
Nanomaterials and Nanomachines: Nanotechnology could revolutionize manufacturing, medicine, and environmental remediation. Nanomaterials with unique properties could be used to create ultra-strong, lightweight materials, while nanomachines could be deployed for targeted drug delivery or environmental cleanup.

6. Artificial Intelligence and Automation:

AI-Driven Sustainability: AI will play a crucial role in optimizing resource use, managing energy systems, and developing new sustainable technologies. AI-powered systems could monitor the environment, predict resource needs, and optimize complex systems.
Automation and Robotics: Advanced robotics and automation will likely be used in manufacturing, agriculture, and even resource extraction, improving efficiency and reducing human impact on the environment.

7. Social and Ethical Considerations:

Equity and Access: Ensuring equitable access to sustainable technologies will be a crucial challenge. Policies and social structures will need to be designed to prevent the creation of new forms of inequality.
Ethical Implications: As technologies like AI and biotechnology advance, careful consideration must be given to their ethical implications. Robust ethical frameworks will be needed to guide their development and use.
Global Cooperation: Addressing the challenges of sustainability will require global cooperation. International agreements and institutions will be needed to manage shared resources and promote sustainable practices.

8. Conclusion:

The sustainable technologies of 3170 will likely be far more advanced and integrated than anything we can currently imagine. While the specific details remain uncertain, the general direction is clear: a future where human society lives in harmony with the planet, utilizing technology to enhance well-being and preserve the environment for future generations. The journey to this future begins now, with the choices we make today.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

It’s fascinating to consider the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3170! Here are some potential scenarios, keeping in mind that this is highly speculative:

1. Advanced Manufacturing:

Closed-loop Production: Factories of 3170 might operate on closed-loop systems where all waste is recycled and reused on-site. Advanced 3D printing and nanotechnology could allow for on-demand manufacturing of highly customized products with minimal material waste.
Bio-Integrated Manufacturing: Imagine factories that utilize bio-engineered organisms to produce materials and products. This could lead to the creation of biodegradable plastics, self-healing materials, and even products that grow themselves.
Energy-Efficient Processes: Manufacturing processes will likely be highly optimized for energy efficiency, utilizing advanced AI and automation to minimize energy consumption. Factories might be powered by on-site renewable energy sources or even more exotic forms of energy.

2. Resource Extraction:

Sustainable Mining: Mining operations in 3170 might be vastly different from today. Advanced robotics and AI could allow for highly precise and minimally invasive extraction of resources, minimizing environmental impact.
Space-Based Resource Utilization: Asteroid mining and lunar resource extraction could become commonplace, providing access to valuable materials without further depleting Earth’s resources.
Ocean Mining: Sustainable technologies might allow for the extraction of resources from the ocean without harming marine ecosystems. This could involve using advanced submersibles and remotely operated vehicles to collect minerals and other materials.

3. Agriculture and Food Production:

Vertical Farms and Hydroponics: Urban farming will likely be highly advanced, with vertical farms and hydroponic systems integrated into city infrastructure. These systems could produce fresh food with minimal land use and water consumption.
Precision Agriculture: AI and sensor technologies could be used to optimize agricultural practices, reducing water and fertilizer use while maximizing yields.
Cultivated Meat and Alternative Proteins: The production of meat and other animal products could shift towards cultivated meat and alternative protein sources, reducing the environmental impact of traditional agriculture.

4. Infrastructure Development:

Self-Healing Infrastructure: Buildings and infrastructure could be made from self-healing materials that can repair themselves, reducing maintenance costs and extending lifespan.
Smart Infrastructure: AI and sensor networks could be used to monitor and manage infrastructure, optimizing its performance and preventing failures.
Sustainable Construction: Construction practices will likely focus on using sustainable materials and minimizing environmental impact. Buildings might be designed to generate their own energy and recycle water.

5. Transportation:

Advanced Transportation Networks: Transportation systems could be highly integrated and automated, with high-speed trains, autonomous vehicles, and even personal air mobility devices.
Sustainable Fuels: Transportation will likely be powered by sustainable energy sources, such as advanced biofuels, hydrogen, or electricity.
Hyperloops and Maglev Trains: Long-distance travel could be revolutionized by technologies like hyperloops and maglev trains, which offer high-speed transportation with minimal energy consumption.

Important Considerations:

Automation and Labor: The widespread adoption of automation and AI could have significant implications for labor markets. New industries and job roles may emerge, but careful planning will be needed to ensure a just transition.
Ethical Considerations: As technologies like AI and biotechnology become more advanced, ethical considerations will be crucial. Ensuring that these technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of humanity will be essential.
Global Equity: Access to sustainable technologies should be equitable. International cooperation will be needed to ensure that developing countries have access to the technologies they need to thrive in a sustainable future.

The industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3170 will likely be transformative, reshaping the way we produce goods, extract resources, grow food, and build our infrastructure. While the exact nature of these technologies remains uncertain, the general direction is clear: a future where industry operates in harmony with the planet, minimizing environmental impact and promoting sustainability for generations to come.Sources and related content

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3170 ?

Research and development (R&D) for sustainable technology in 3170 is a fascinating area to explore, even if it’s highly speculative! Here’s how we might approach it, considering the long-term perspective:

1. Fundamental Science:

New Energy Sources: Research into completely new forms of energy generation beyond what we know today. This might involve exploring exotic physics, tapping into zero-point energy, or harnessing energy from other dimensions (if they exist!).
Material Science Revolution: Developing materials with unprecedented properties: self-healing, adaptive, programmable matter, room-temperature superconductors, materials that can perfectly mimic biological functions, etc.
Understanding Consciousness: Investigating the nature of consciousness and its connection to the physical world. This could lead to breakthroughs in energy, communication, and even our understanding of the universe.

2. Biotechnology and Bio-Integration:

Synthetic Biology: Designing and engineering new biological systems with specific functions. This could lead to the creation of bio-engineered materials, energy sources, and even living machines.
Human Augmentation: Exploring ways to enhance human capabilities through biotechnology, potentially leading to increased lifespan, improved health, and enhanced cognitive abilities.
Brain-Computer Interfaces: Developing advanced interfaces that allow seamless communication between the human brain and computers, potentially revolutionizing education, communication, and even our understanding of consciousness.

3. Artificial Intelligence and Complex Systems:

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI): Creating AI systems with human-level intelligence and beyond, capable of solving complex problems and making breakthroughs in various fields.
AI-Driven Research: Utilizing AI to accelerate scientific discovery, analyze vast datasets, and identify patterns that humans might miss.
Complex Systems Modeling: Developing sophisticated models of complex systems like the Earth’s climate, ecosystems, and even human society to better understand and manage these systems.

4. Space Exploration and Resource Utilization:

Advanced Propulsion Systems: Developing new propulsion technologies that allow for faster and more efficient space travel, enabling exploration of distant star systems.
In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU): Perfecting technologies for extracting and utilizing resources from asteroids, planets, and other celestial bodies.
Terraforming: Researching the possibility of terraforming other planets to make them habitable for humans.

5. Social and Ethical Dimensions:

Sustainable Societies: Studying how to create sustainable societies that are equitable, just, and resilient in the face of environmental challenges.
Ethical Frameworks: Developing robust ethical frameworks to guide the development and use of advanced technologies, ensuring they are used for the benefit of humanity.
Global Cooperation: Fostering international collaboration and knowledge sharing to accelerate the development of sustainable technologies.

Important Considerations:

Long-Term Vision: R&D for sustainable technology in 3170 requires a long-term perspective, with investments in fundamental science that may not yield immediate results.
Interdisciplinary Approach: Collaboration among scientists, engineers, social scientists, and ethicists will be essential to address the complex challenges of sustainability.
Ethical Considerations: Careful consideration must be given to the ethical implications of advanced technologies, ensuring that they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.

The R&D efforts of today will lay the foundation for the sustainable technologies of 3170. By investing in fundamental science, fostering innovation, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can pave the way for a future where humanity thrives in harmony with the planet.

COURTESY : Carnegie India

References

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