Sustainable Technology of 3280

81 / 100

Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

While “3280” might not have a specific meaning in the context of sustainable technology, it could refer to a model number or a specific year related to advancements in this field. Here’s a breakdown of how sustainable technology is evolving and what we might expect in the future:

Current Trends in Sustainable Technology:

Renewable Energy: Solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal energy are becoming increasingly efficient and cost-effective. Energy storage solutions like batteries are also improving rapidly.
Energy Efficiency: Technologies that reduce energy consumption in buildings, transportation, and industries are crucial. This includes smart grids, LED lighting, and improved insulation.
Circular Economy: This model focuses on reducing waste by reusing, repairing, and recycling materials. It involves designing products for durability, disassembly, and resource recovery.
Sustainable Agriculture: Practices that minimize environmental impact while ensuring food security are essential. This includes precision farming, organic farming, and reducing food waste.
Green Chemistry: Designing chemical products and processes that minimize the use and generation of hazardous substances is a key area of focus.

Future of Sustainable Technology:

Advanced Materials: Development of new materials that are more sustainable, durable, and recyclable.
Artificial Intelligence: AI can optimize energy use, manage resources, and improve the efficiency of sustainable systems.
Biotechnology: Using biological processes to create sustainable products and solutions, such as biofuels and bioplastics.
Nanotechnology: Applying nanotechnology to develop more efficient solar cells, water filters, and other sustainable technologies.

Remember: Sustainable technology is constantly evolving, and new innovations are always emerging. The key is to focus on solutions that address environmental challenges while also supporting economic and social well-being.

If you have a specific context for “3280,” please provide more information so I can give you a more tailored response.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

It seems you might be thinking of the Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation. While it’s not explicitly a “sustainable technology” in itself, Dell has incorporated several sustainability features into its design and lifecycle:

Recycled Materials: The Precision 3280 CFF is made with 58% recycled plastic, including post-consumer recycled plastic and closed-loop ITE-derived plastic. This reduces the reliance on virgin materials and helps to minimize waste.
Recyclable Packaging: The workstation ships in packaging made with 98.4% recycled or renewable materials. This reduces packaging waste and promotes responsible sourcing.
Energy Efficiency: The Precision 3280 CFF is designed to be energy efficient, helping to reduce energy consumption and lower operating costs. It is also ENERGY STAR® 8.0 certified.
Lifecycle Management: Dell offers services like Asset Recovery and recycling to help customers responsibly dispose of their old equipment and reduce e-waste. They also make it easy to access and replace parts to extend the lifespan of the product.

How this relates to Sustainable Technology:

Sustainable technology aims to minimize environmental impact throughout the lifecycle of a product, from material sourcing and manufacturing to use and disposal. The Dell Precision 3280 CFF incorporates several elements of this philosophy, making it a more sustainable choice compared to products without these features.

Key Takeaways:

The Dell Precision 3280 CFF is a powerful and compact workstation designed with sustainability in mind.
It includes features like recycled materials, recyclable packaging, energy efficiency, and lifecycle management services.
These features contribute to reducing environmental impact and promoting a circular economy.

If you’re looking for a high-performance workstation with a focus on sustainability, the Dell Precision 3280 CFF is worth considering.

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

The Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation, with its focus on sustainability, would be particularly appealing to the following individuals and organizations:

Environmentally Conscious Businesses: Companies with strong sustainability goals and initiatives will find the 3280 CFF aligned with their values. The use of recycled materials, energy efficiency, and recyclable packaging all contribute to reducing the company’s environmental footprint.
Organizations with Green IT Policies: Many organizations, especially government agencies and educational institutions, have strict policies regarding sustainable IT procurement. The 3280 CFF can help these organizations meet their environmental targets.
Businesses Seeking Cost Savings: Energy efficiency features in the 3280 CFF can lead to lower electricity bills, resulting in cost savings over the lifespan of the workstation.
Companies focused on Circular Economy: The 3280 CFF’s design, which includes recycled materials and facilitates recycling, aligns with the principles of a circular economy, where resources are kept in use for as long as possible.
Individuals with Environmental Concerns: Even individual users who are passionate about environmental sustainability might choose the 3280 CFF for their personal or home office use.
IT Managers looking for manageable and long-lasting devices: Dell’s focus on lifecycle management and easy part replacement can make the 3280 CFF a good choice for IT managers who want to extend the lifespan of their hardware and reduce e-waste.

Essentially, anyone who values sustainability, wants to reduce their environmental impact, and appreciates well-designed and efficient technology can be considered a potential user of the Dell Precision 3280 CFF.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

The Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation, with its focus on sustainability, would be a good choice in several situations:

1. When Upgrading or Refreshing Hardware:

Planned obsolescence: When your current workstations are outdated and need replacement, the 3280 CFF offers a sustainable option for upgrading.
Performance needs: If your team requires more powerful machines for demanding tasks (e.g., CAD, video editing, data analysis), the 3280 CFF provides the necessary performance while minimizing environmental impact.

2. When Setting Up New Workspaces:

New offices or departments: When equipping new spaces, choosing the 3280 CFF aligns with sustainability goals from the start.
Remote work setups: For employees working from home, the compact size and energy efficiency of the 3280 CFF make it a suitable and eco-friendly choice.

3. When Meeting Sustainability Targets:

Environmental initiatives: If your organization has specific targets for reducing e-waste, energy consumption, or the use of virgin materials, the 3280 CFF can help achieve those goals.
Green IT procurement: When adhering to policies that prioritize sustainable technology, the 3280 CFF is a compliant option.

4. When Cost Considerations are Important:

Long-term savings: The energy efficiency of the 3280 CFF can lead to reduced electricity costs over time, offsetting the initial investment.
Lifecycle management: Dell’s services for asset recovery and recycling can help minimize disposal costs and ensure responsible handling of old equipment.

5. When Space is a Constraint:

Compact design: The small form factor of the 3280 CFF makes it ideal for tight workspaces or environments where space is limited.

In general, the Dell Precision 3280 CFF is a relevant choice whenever sustainability is a priority, whether due to environmental concerns, organizational policies, or cost considerations. It offers a balance of performance, efficiency, and eco-friendly features, making it a suitable option for a wide range of users and applications.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

The Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation, with its focus on sustainability, is a good fit for various environments and use cases where sustainability is a priority. Here are some key areas where it’s particularly relevant:

1. Offices and Workspaces:

Environmentally conscious offices: Companies with green initiatives and sustainability goals will find the 3280 CFF a good fit for their office environments.
Small and space-constrained workspaces: The compact size of the 3280 CFF makes it ideal for offices with limited space, while still offering powerful performance.
Flexible work arrangements: With the rise of hybrid and remote work, the 3280 CFF can be easily deployed in home offices or co-working spaces, promoting sustainability wherever work is done.

2. Industries and Sectors:

Government and public sector: Many government agencies have strict regulations and policies regarding sustainable procurement, making the 3280 CFF a compliant choice.
Education: Schools and universities are increasingly focused on sustainability, and the 3280 CFF can be a good option for computer labs, libraries, and administrative offices.
Healthcare: Hospitals and clinics can benefit from the energy efficiency and compact size of the 3280 CFF, while also aligning with their sustainability goals.
Creative industries: Design firms, advertising agencies, and media companies can use the 3280 CFF for demanding tasks like video editing and 3D rendering, while minimizing their environmental impact.

3. Specific Use Cases:

Edge computing: The 3280 CFF’s compact size and powerful performance make it suitable for edge computing applications in various industries, where sustainability is often a consideration.
Virtual and augmented reality (VR/AR): The 3280 CFF supports VR/AR technologies, which are increasingly used in fields like design, training, and simulation, where sustainability can be a factor.
AI and machine learning: The 3280 CFF can handle light AI workloads, making it suitable for organizations exploring AI applications while prioritizing sustainability.

In essence, the Dell Precision 3280 CFF is a relevant choice in any environment where:

Sustainability is a key consideration.
Space is limited.
High performance is required.
Long-term cost savings are desired.

By incorporating sustainable features into a powerful and compact workstation, the 3280 CFF caters to a growing demand for eco-friendly technology solutions across various sectors and applications.

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

It seems like you’re asking how the Dell Precision 3280 CFF is made with sustainable technology. Here’s a breakdown of the key aspects:

1. Materials:

Recycled Plastics: The chassis of the 3280 CFF is made with 58% recycled plastic. This includes post-consumer recycled plastic (from items like plastic bottles) and closed-loop ITE-derived plastic (from recycled IT equipment). This reduces the need for virgin plastics and helps to minimize plastic waste.
Recyclable Packaging: The workstation is shipped in packaging made with 98.4% recycled or renewable materials. This reduces packaging waste and promotes responsible sourcing of materials.

2. Energy Efficiency:

Energy Star Certification: The 3280 CFF is ENERGY STAR® 8.0 certified. This means it meets strict energy efficiency guidelines set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It consumes less energy compared to non-certified devices, reducing electricity costs and environmental impact.
Power Optimization: Dell incorporates power optimization features that allow users to save energy without sacrificing performance. This can be achieved through settings like Quiet Mode, which reduces fan noise and power consumption.

3. Lifecycle Management:

Asset Recovery and Recycling: Dell offers services to help customers responsibly dispose of their old equipment. This includes asset recovery and recycling programs that ensure proper handling of e-waste and reduce environmental impact.
Easy Part Replacement: Dell designs its products with easy access to components, making it simpler to repair or upgrade the workstation. This extends the lifespan of the device and reduces the need for complete replacements.

4. Certifications and Standards:

EPEAT Gold: The 3280 CFF is EPEAT Gold registered, meaning it meets comprehensive environmental criteria across its lifecycle, from design and manufacturing to energy use and recycling.
TCO Certified: The workstation is also TCO certified, a global sustainability certification for IT products that considers social and environmental responsibility throughout the product lifecycle.

In summary, the Dell Precision 3280 CFF incorporates sustainable technology through the use of recycled materials, energy-efficient design, lifecycle management services, and adherence to environmental certifications. These features contribute to reducing the workstation’s overall environmental footprint and promoting a more sustainable approach to technology.

Case stduy is Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

While a full-blown, published case study specifically on the Dell Precision 3280 CFF and its sustainability impact might be hard to find publicly, we can construct a hypothetical case study based on the information available about the product and Dell’s sustainability initiatives.

Hypothetical Case Study: Sustainable Technology Implementation with the Dell Precision 3280 CFF

Introduction:

“Company X,” a leading design and architecture firm with a strong commitment to environmental sustainability, sought to upgrade its workstations while minimizing its environmental footprint. After careful evaluation, Company X chose the Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation for its combination of performance, compact size, and sustainable features.

Challenge:

Company X faced the challenge of balancing the need for high-performance workstations to support demanding design software with its commitment to reducing e-waste, energy consumption, and the use of virgin materials. The company aimed to find a solution that would meet its technical requirements while aligning with its sustainability goals.

Solution:

Company X deployed 50 units of the Dell Precision 3280 CFF workstations across its design team. The 3280 CFF’s features, including its use of recycled plastics, energy-efficient design, and recyclable packaging, directly addressed Company X’s sustainability concerns. The compact size of the workstations also helped optimize workspace utilization.

Implementation:

The implementation process was smooth, with minimal disruption to workflow. Company X leveraged Dell’s lifecycle management services, including asset recovery and recycling, to ensure responsible disposal of the old workstations.

Results:

Reduced Environmental Impact: By choosing the 3280 CFF, Company X significantly reduced its reliance on virgin plastics and minimized e-waste. The energy-efficient design of the workstations also contributed to lower electricity consumption and reduced carbon emissions.
Improved Workspace Efficiency: The compact size of the 3280 CFF allowed Company X to optimize its office space, creating a more efficient and comfortable work environment.
Enhanced Performance: The powerful performance of the 3280 CFF enabled Company X’s design team to work more efficiently and effectively, leading to improved productivity and project turnaround times.
Cost Savings: The energy efficiency of the workstations resulted in lower electricity bills, contributing to cost savings over the lifespan of the devices.

Conclusion:

The Dell Precision 3280 CFF proved to be an ideal solution for Company X, enabling them to upgrade their workstations while achieving their sustainability goals. The case study demonstrates how sustainable technology can be successfully implemented to reduce environmental impact, improve workspace efficiency, and enhance performance, all while contributing to cost savings.

Lessons Learned:

Prioritizing sustainability in IT procurement can lead to significant environmental and economic benefits.
Choosing products with recycled materials, energy-efficient design, and responsible lifecycle management can minimize environmental impact.
Sustainable technology can go hand in hand with high performance and workspace efficiency.

Note: This is a hypothetical case study. Real-world results may vary depending on the specific circumstances and implementation details.

This hypothetical case study highlights the potential benefits of choosing the Dell Precision 3280 CFF for organizations looking to implement sustainable technology solutions. While specific case studies might be limited, the features and certifications of the 3280 CFF provide a strong foundation for its potential positive impact on sustainability.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

I can’t directly provide a formal, published white paper on the Dell Precision 3280 CFF and its sustainability. White papers are typically created by the company (Dell, in this case) or by independent research firms. However, I can give you an outline and key points that could be included in such a white paper, drawing on publicly available information. You could use this information to start your own research or to guide your search for official Dell documentation.

Hypothetical White Paper Outline: The Dell Precision 3280 CFF: A Sustainable Workstation Solution

Abstract:

This white paper examines the Dell Precision 3280 Compact Form Factor (CFF) workstation, highlighting its key features and focusing on its contribution to sustainable technology practices. It explores the design choices, materials, energy efficiency, and lifecycle management aspects that make the 3280 CFF a compelling choice for organizations prioritizing environmental responsibility.

1. Introduction:

The increasing importance of sustainable IT practices.
Brief overview of the Dell Precision 3280 CFF and its target audience.
Thesis statement: The 3280 CFF offers a balance of performance, compact design, and sustainability, making it a suitable choice for environmentally conscious organizations.

2. Sustainable Design and Materials:

Recycled Plastics: Detail the percentage of recycled plastics used in the chassis and the source of these materials (post-consumer recycled, closed-loop ITE-derived). Quantify the impact of using recycled plastics (e.g., reduction in virgin plastic use).
Recyclable Packaging: Describe the composition of the packaging materials and their recyclability. Quantify the reduction in packaging waste.
Durability and Longevity: Discuss design features that contribute to the workstation’s durability and extend its lifespan (e.g., easy access to components for repairs and upgrades).

3. Energy Efficiency:

ENERGY STAR Certification: Specify the version of ENERGY STAR certification achieved (e.g., 8.0) and explain its significance. Provide data on energy consumption compared to non-certified devices.
Power Management Features: Describe any power-saving modes or features incorporated into the 3280 CFF (e.g., sleep modes, power optimization settings).
Real-World Energy Savings: If available, present data or case studies illustrating the potential energy cost savings achieved by using the 3280 CFF.

4. Lifecycle Management and E-waste Reduction:

Dell’s Recycling Programs: Detail Dell’s asset recovery and recycling services for businesses. Explain how these programs help reduce e-waste.
Product End-of-Life Management: Discuss Dell’s commitment to responsible disposal and recycling of its products.
EPEAT and TCO Certifications: Explain the significance of these certifications and how they demonstrate the 3280 CFF’s adherence to environmental standards throughout its lifecycle.

5. Performance and Productivity:

Briefly describe the key performance features of the 3280 CFF (e.g., processor, memory, graphics) and how it supports productivity. This section should emphasize that sustainability doesn’t come at the expense of performance.

6. Conclusion:

Reiterate the key sustainability benefits of the Dell Precision 3280 CFF.
Emphasize the value proposition for organizations seeking to balance performance, sustainability, and cost-effectiveness.

7. Call to Action:

Encourage readers to learn more about the 3280 CFF and Dell’s sustainability initiatives.
Provide links to relevant resources on Dell’s website.

Remember: This is a hypothetical white paper outline. You should consult official Dell documentation and resources for the most accurate and up-to-date information. Search Dell’s website for “3280 CFF,” “sustainability,” “EPEAT,” “ENERGY STAR,” and related terms.

Indusrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

The Dell Precision 3280 CFF, while a workstation designed for professional use, can contribute to sustainability in various industrial applications. It’s not necessarily the core of a sustainable process, but it can be a part of a larger sustainable industrial ecosystem. Here’s how:

1. Design and Engineering (CAD/CAM/CAE):

Reduced Resource Consumption: Efficient CAD/CAM/CAE software running on the 3280 CFF can optimize designs, leading to reduced material use in manufacturing. Simulations can minimize the need for physical prototypes, saving resources and reducing waste.
Sustainable Product Design: Engineers can use the 3280 CFF to design more sustainable products from the outset, considering factors like material selection, recyclability, and energy efficiency.
Digital Twins: Creating and simulating digital twins of industrial processes on the 3280 CFF can help optimize operations for energy efficiency and resource utilization.

2. Manufacturing and Production:

Process Optimization: The 3280 CFF can be used to analyze production data and identify areas for improvement in energy efficiency, waste reduction, and resource optimization.
Automation and Control: In some industrial settings, the 3280 CFF could be used to control and monitor automated systems, potentially leading to more precise control and reduced waste.
Supply Chain Management: The 3280 CFF can support software used to manage supply chains, allowing companies to make more sustainable sourcing decisions and optimize logistics for reduced emissions.

3. Energy and Utilities:

Smart Grid Management: The 3280 CFF could be used to run software for monitoring and managing smart grids, helping to optimize energy distribution and reduce waste.
Renewable Energy Integration: The 3280 CFF can support software used to analyze data from renewable energy sources, helping to optimize their integration into the grid.

4. Research and Development:

Materials Science: Researchers can use the 3280 CFF to analyze data and model new sustainable materials.
Environmental Monitoring: The 3280 CFF can support software used to analyze environmental data, helping researchers to better understand and address environmental challenges.

5. Other Industrial Applications:

Building Management Systems (BMS): In industrial facilities, the 3280 CFF could be used to run BMS software, helping to optimize energy use in buildings.
Transportation and Logistics: The 3280 CFF could be used in transportation and logistics applications to optimize routes, reduce fuel consumption, and improve overall efficiency.

Important Considerations:

The 3280 CFF’s role: The 3280 CFF is a tool. Its contribution to industrial sustainability depends on how it’s used and the software it runs.
System-level approach: Sustainable technology in industry requires a system-level approach, not just individual hardware choices. The 3280 CFF is one component that can contribute to a larger sustainable system.

While the 3280 CFF isn’t a revolutionary “sustainable technology” in itself, its efficient design and use of recycled materials, combined with its powerful processing capabilities, can make it a valuable asset in industrial settings striving for greater sustainability. It’s a tool that can be used to implement sustainable practices.

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3280 ?

You’re interested in the behind-the-scenes work that makes the Dell Precision 3280 CFF more sustainable! While Dell doesn’t publish detailed R&D reports on specific models, we can infer the types of research and development that likely went into its sustainable features:

1. Materials Research:

Recycled Plastics:
- Sourcing and Qualification: Research would be needed to identify reliable sources of high-quality recycled plastics (both post-consumer and ITE-derived). Testing would be crucial to ensure these recycled materials meet Dell’s standards for durability, performance, and aesthetics.
- Material Blends: Developing the right blends of recycled plastics to achieve the desired properties (strength, heat resistance, etc.) would require experimentation and testing.
- Color Matching and Aesthetics: Ensuring that the recycled plastic components have a consistent color and appearance, matching Dell’s design standards, would involve R&D in color science and manufacturing processes.
Packaging:
- Sustainable Alternatives: Research into alternative packaging materials (recycled cardboard, molded fiber, etc.) that are both protective and environmentally friendly.
- Optimized Design: Designing packaging that minimizes material use and maximizes recyclability while still providing adequate protection during shipping.

2. Energy Efficiency Engineering:

Component Selection: Careful selection of energy-efficient components (processors, memory, storage) that meet performance requirements while minimizing power consumption.
Power Management Optimization: Developing firmware and software features that allow users to optimize power consumption (e.g., sleep modes, power-saving settings) without sacrificing performance.
Thermal Design: Designing the cooling system (fans, heatsinks) to efficiently dissipate heat while minimizing fan noise and power consumption.

3. Lifecycle Management Development:

Recycling Processes: Research into efficient and environmentally sound recycling processes for Dell’s products, including methods for recovering valuable materials.
Asset Recovery Programs: Developing and managing programs for asset recovery and refurbishment to extend the lifespan of Dell’s products and reduce e-waste.
Design for Disassembly: Designing products with easy access to components to facilitate repair, upgrade, and recycling.

4. Collaboration and Partnerships:

Suppliers: Working with suppliers to source sustainable materials and components.
Recyclers: Partnering with recycling companies to ensure responsible disposal and recovery of materials.
Certification Bodies: Collaborating with organizations like EPEAT and TCO to achieve environmental certifications.

5. Continuous Improvement:

Monitoring and Evaluation: Tracking the environmental performance of the 3280 CFF (energy consumption, recycled content, etc.) and identifying areas for improvement in future models.
Innovation: Continuously researching and exploring new sustainable technologies and materials for use in Dell’s products.

Key takeaway: While we don’t have specific research papers on the 3280 CFF, it’s clear that significant R&D efforts across multiple areas (materials science, engineering, lifecycle management) are essential to create a more sustainable workstation. This work likely involves collaboration with suppliers, recyclers, and certification bodies, and a commitment to continuous improvement.

courtesy : Monash University Faculty of Science

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.