Sustainable Technology of 3530

81 / 100

Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

Unfortunately, there is no widely recognized or established concept of “Sustainable Technology of 3530”. It’s possible that this term is specific to a certain industry, research project, or fictional context.

However, the concept of sustainable technology in general is well-established and refers to innovations that aim to minimize negative impacts on the environment and promote social and economic well-being.

If you could provide more context about where you encountered this term, I may be able to provide a more specific answer. In the meantime, I can share some information about sustainable technology in general:

Definition: Sustainable technology encompasses a wide range of innovations that consider the entire lifecycle of products and processes, from design and manufacturing to use and disposal. It seeks to reduce resource consumption, minimize pollution, and promote social equity.
Examples: Some common examples of sustainable technology include renewable energy sources (solar, wind, hydro), energy-efficient appliances and buildings, electric vehicles, sustainable agriculture practices, and water conservation technologies.
Benefits: Sustainable technology offers numerous benefits, including environmental protection, economic growth, and improved quality of life. It can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, conserve natural resources, create new jobs, and improve public health.

If you’re interested in learning more about sustainable technology, I recommend exploring resources from organizations like the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the International Energy Agency (IEA), and the Worldwatch Institute.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

Unfortunately, “Sustainable Technology of 3530” doesn’t seem to be a recognized term or concept. It’s possible that it’s:

A very niche or specific term: It might be used in a particular field, research project, or even a fictional context.
A misunderstanding or typo: Perhaps the year is incorrect, or the term is slightly different.

However, we can still talk about sustainable technology in general and how it might evolve in the future. Here are some thoughts on what sustainable technology might look like in the distant future:

Possible Trends in Sustainable Technology by 3530:

Advanced Material Science: We might see the development of incredibly strong, lightweight, and biodegradable materials for construction, transportation, and manufacturing. Imagine buildings that can adapt to changing weather conditions or self-healing materials that repair damage automatically.
Energy Revolution: Renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and geothermal could become incredibly efficient and integrated into our daily lives. We might even see new forms of energy generation based on currently unknown principles of physics.
Closed-Loop Systems: Technologies that mimic natural ecosystems by creating closed-loop systems for resource use and waste management could become widespread. This would minimize waste and pollution, creating a truly circular economy.
Biotechnology and Biomimicry: We might see a fusion of biology and technology, with the development of bio-integrated devices, self-assembling structures, and even technologies that can directly interact with living organisms in a sustainable way.
Artificial Intelligence and Automation: AI could play a crucial role in optimizing resource use, managing energy grids, and automating sustainable practices across industries.

Important Considerations:

Ethical Implications: As technology advances, it’s crucial to consider the ethical implications of its development and use. We need to ensure that sustainable technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.
Social Equity: Sustainable technology should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their location or socioeconomic status. It’s important to address issues of equity and ensure that the benefits of sustainable technology are shared by all.
Adaptability: The world is constantly changing, so sustainable technologies need to be adaptable to new challenges and evolving needs.

While we can’t predict the future with certainty, it’s exciting to imagine the possibilities of sustainable technology in the distant future. By continuing to innovate and prioritize sustainability, we can create a world where technology and nature coexist in harmony.

If you can provide any additional context about the term “Sustainable Technology of 3530,” I’ll do my best to provide a more specific and relevant answer.

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

It seems we’re still dealing with a bit of a mystery with “Sustainable Technology of 3530”! Since it’s not a recognized term, it’s hard to pinpoint exactly who would be “required” to use it.

However, if we think about sustainable technology in general, and how it might evolve over time, we can make some educated guesses about who might be involved in its development and use in the future:

Likely Players in Sustainable Technology of the Future:

Scientists and Engineers: They will be at the forefront of developing new sustainable technologies, from advanced materials and energy sources to bio-integrated devices and AI-driven systems.
Governments and Policymakers: They will play a crucial role in setting regulations, providing incentives, and fostering international cooperation to ensure the responsible development and deployment of sustainable technologies.
Businesses and Industries: Companies will need to adopt and implement sustainable technologies across their operations, from manufacturing and supply chains to product design and waste management.
Individuals and Consumers: We all have a role to play in embracing sustainable practices in our daily lives, from making conscious consumption choices to supporting businesses that prioritize sustainability.
Future Generations: Ultimately, the beneficiaries of sustainable technology will be future generations who will inherit the planet and its resources.

Why These Players Are Important:

Innovation: Scientists and engineers drive the creation of new sustainable solutions.
Regulation: Governments provide the framework for responsible technology use.
Implementation: Businesses put sustainable technologies into practice.
Adoption: Individuals make sustainable choices in their daily lives.
Legacy: Future generations inherit the consequences of our actions.

Thinking about the year 3530 specifically, it’s possible that:

New fields of expertise may emerge: We can’t even imagine what kind of specialized knowledge might be needed to develop and utilize sustainable technologies in such a distant future.
Collaboration will be key: Solving complex sustainability challenges will require collaboration across disciplines, sectors, and even nations.
Ethical considerations will be paramount: Ensuring that technology is used responsibly and for the benefit of all will be crucial.

While we can’t know for sure what “Sustainable Technology of 3530” will entail, it’s clear that a wide range of actors will be involved in shaping a sustainable future.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

It seems we’re having a bit of a time-traveling conundrum with “Sustainable Technology of 3530”! Since it’s not a known concept, it’s hard to say when it would be “required.”

However, let’s shift our perspective and think about sustainable technology in general, and how its urgency might evolve over time:

The Need for Sustainable Technology: A Timeless Imperative

Now: The need for sustainable technology is undeniably urgent. We are already facing the consequences of climate change, resource depletion, and environmental degradation. The sooner we adopt and advance sustainable solutions, the better.
The Future: The need for sustainable technology will only become more critical as populations grow, resources dwindle, and the impacts of climate change intensify. Future generations will rely on sustainable practices to ensure their survival and well-being.

Why the Urgency Matters:

Climate Change: We need to drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the worst effects of climate change, such as rising sea levels, extreme weather events, and disruptions to ecosystems.
Resource Depletion: Many of the Earth’s resources are finite. Sustainable technology can help us use resources more efficiently, find alternatives, and create a circular economy where waste is minimized.
Environmental Degradation: Pollution, deforestation, and habitat loss are harming ecosystems and threatening biodiversity. Sustainable technology can help us protect and restore the environment.
Social Equity: Sustainable technology can help address issues of poverty, inequality, and access to basic resources. It can create new jobs, improve public health, and promote social justice.

Thinking about the year 3530:

The challenges may be different: While we can’t predict the future, it’s likely that new environmental and social challenges will emerge. Sustainable technology will need to adapt to these challenges.
The stakes will be higher: If we don’t act now to develop and implement sustainable solutions, the consequences for future generations could be severe.

In conclusion:

The need for sustainable technology is not limited to a specific time. It’s an ongoing and evolving imperative that requires immediate action and long-term commitment. Whether we’re talking about today or the distant future, sustainable technology is essential for creating a healthy planet and a thriving society for all.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

You’re right to ask “where”! It brings up a really interesting point about how we think about sustainable technology.

Since “Sustainable Technology of 3530” isn’t a real thing, let’s talk about where sustainable technology, in general, is needed, both now and potentially in the future.

Sustainable Technology is needed EVERYWHERE:

Globally: We need international cooperation to address global challenges like climate change, resource depletion, and biodiversity loss. Sustainable technologies need to be shared and implemented across borders.
Locally: Sustainable solutions need to be tailored to specific environmental and social contexts. What works in one region might not work in another.
In every sector: From energy and transportation to agriculture and manufacturing, every sector needs to adopt sustainable practices and technologies.
In our daily lives: We all have a role to play in embracing sustainable choices in our homes, workplaces, and communities.

Thinking about the year 3530:

Even in space! As humanity potentially expands beyond Earth, sustainable technologies will be crucial for space exploration and colonization. We’ll need to find ways to live and work in space without harming other celestial bodies.
In virtual worlds: If virtual realities become a significant part of human life, we’ll need to ensure that they are powered sustainably and that they don’t contribute to environmental problems in the real world.
Wherever humans go: Wherever humans live and interact with the environment, sustainable technology will be essential for ensuring a healthy planet and a thriving society.

Key takeaway:

Sustainable technology is not limited to a specific place. It’s a universal need that applies to all areas of human activity, both now and in the future. Whether we’re talking about our homes, our cities, or even other planets, sustainable technology is essential for creating a better world for all.

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

You’re asking a great question, and it highlights the core of what sustainable technology is all about! Since “Sustainable Technology of 3530” isn’t a defined thing, let’s focus on how sustainable technology, in general, is “required,” both now and looking ahead. It’s less about a mandate and more about a necessity.

Sustainable Technology is “required” through a combination of factors:

Environmental Imperative: Our planet’s resources are finite, and our current practices are causing significant environmental damage. Sustainable technology is required to mitigate climate change, protect biodiversity, and ensure a healthy planet for future generations. This isn’t a choice, it’s a necessity for survival.
Economic Viability: Sustainable technologies can drive innovation, create new jobs, and reduce costs in the long run. A circular economy, where resources are reused and waste is minimized, is not just environmentally sound, it’s economically smart.
Social Responsibility: Sustainable technology can improve quality of life, promote social equity, and address issues like poverty and access to clean water and energy. It’s about creating a just and equitable society for all.
Technological Advancement: As technology advances, we have the opportunity to develop even more efficient and sustainable solutions. Continued research and development are crucial for creating the sustainable technologies of the future.
Policy and Regulation: Governments play a vital role in setting standards, providing incentives, and creating a level playing field for sustainable technologies. Policies can drive adoption and innovation.
Consumer Demand: Increasingly, consumers are demanding sustainable products and services. This consumer pressure can drive businesses to adopt more sustainable practices.

Looking towards 3530 (and beyond):

Adaptability: Sustainable technology will need to be adaptable to changing environmental conditions, resource availability, and societal needs.
Interconnectedness: Solutions will likely be interconnected, requiring a systems-thinking approach. For example, energy, water, and food systems will need to be managed sustainably and holistically.
Ethical Considerations: As technology becomes more powerful, ethical considerations will become even more important. We’ll need to ensure that sustainable technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.

In short: Sustainable technology isn’t “required” by a single entity. It’s required by the very nature of our existence on this planet. It’s a collective responsibility and a continuous process of innovation and adaptation. It’s how we ensure a viable future for ourselves and generations to come.

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

Since “Sustainable Technology of 3530” isn’t a real, defined concept, we can’t do a traditional case study. However, we can create a hypothetical case study, imagining what a sustainable technology of that distant future might look like and how it might function. This allows us to explore the kinds of considerations that might be important.

Hypothetical Case Study: The Global Atmospheric Regeneration Network (GARN) – 3530

Background: By 3530, climate change, while mitigated significantly, has left lasting atmospheric imbalances. Extreme weather events are still a concern, and certain regions struggle with air quality. The Global Atmospheric Regeneration Network (GARN) is a network of interconnected technologies designed to actively manage and balance the Earth’s atmosphere.

Technology: GARN consists of several key components:

Atmospheric Monitoring and Prediction System (AMPS): A global network of sensors and AI-powered systems constantly analyzes atmospheric composition, weather patterns, and potential risks. It can predict extreme weather events with incredible accuracy and identify areas needing intervention.
Regional Atmospheric Regulators (RARs): These are localized systems deployed in strategic locations. They utilize advanced nanotechnology to filter pollutants, adjust air composition (e.g., increasing oxygen levels in specific areas), and even influence local weather patterns (e.g., preventing the formation of superstorms). RARs are powered by renewable energy sources.
Bio-Integrated Carbon Capture and Storage (BICCS): Vast networks of genetically engineered plants and microorganisms are integrated into ecosystems worldwide. These organisms are hyper-efficient at capturing and storing carbon dioxide, effectively drawing down greenhouse gases from the atmosphere. They also produce valuable biofuels and other resources.
Global Climate Governance Platform (GCGP): An international organization oversees the operation of GARN, ensuring its equitable distribution and responsible use. The GCGP also facilitates collaboration between nations on climate-related issues.

Operation:

AMPS constantly monitors the atmosphere and predicts potential problems.
If AMPS detects an impending extreme weather event or regional air quality issue, it alerts the GCGP.
The GCGP authorizes the deployment of RARs to mitigate the problem. RARs use their advanced nanotechnology to address the specific issue, whether it’s filtering pollutants or influencing weather patterns.
BICCS continuously works to capture and store carbon dioxide, helping to maintain a balanced atmosphere over the long term.

Impact:

Reduced extreme weather events: GARN significantly reduces the frequency and intensity of hurricanes, droughts, and other extreme weather events.
Improved air quality: RARs help to clean the air in polluted regions, improving public health and reducing respiratory illnesses.
Balanced atmospheric composition: BICCS helps to maintain a healthy balance of gases in the atmosphere, mitigating the long-term effects of climate change.
International cooperation: GARN fosters international cooperation on climate-related issues, promoting peace and stability.

Challenges:

Technological complexity: Developing and maintaining such a complex global network would be a massive technological challenge.
Ethical considerations: Influencing weather patterns and atmospheric composition raises ethical concerns about unintended consequences and potential misuse.
Governance and equity: Ensuring the equitable distribution and responsible use of GARN would require strong international cooperation and governance.

Conclusion:

This hypothetical case study illustrates how a future sustainable technology might address complex global challenges. While the specifics are speculative, it highlights the kinds of considerations that will be crucial for developing truly sustainable solutions in the long term: technological innovation, ethical responsibility, international cooperation, and a focus on the well-being of both people and the planet.

COURTESY : RBC

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

White Paper: Envisioning Sustainable Technology in 3530

Abstract:

Predicting the specific nature of “Sustainable Technology of 3530” is inherently speculative. However, by extrapolating current trends, considering fundamental scientific principles, and acknowledging the enduring human drive for innovation, we can construct a plausible vision of how technology might contribute to a sustainable future centuries from now. This white paper explores potential technological advancements, societal shifts, and ethical considerations that could shape sustainable practices in the distant future.

1. Introduction:

The concept of sustainability emphasizes meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. Sustainable technology, therefore, aims to minimize environmental impact, promote social equity, and support long-term economic viability. Looking ahead to 3530, we anticipate that the challenges of climate change, resource depletion, and population growth will necessitate even more radical and integrated approaches to sustainability.

2. Potential Technological Advancements:

Advanced Material Science: Imagine materials with self-healing properties, adaptive structures that respond to environmental changes, and biodegradable composites that can be programmed at the molecular level. Construction, manufacturing, and even everyday objects could be composed of these materials, minimizing waste and maximizing resource efficiency.
Energy Revolution: Fusion power, space-based solar energy, and other currently nascent technologies may become commonplace. Energy harvesting could be integrated into the very fabric of our environment, with buildings, roads, and even clothing generating power. Energy storage solutions would likely be highly efficient and decentralized.
Closed-Loop Ecosystems: Mimicking natural ecosystems, closed-loop systems could manage resources at all scales, from individual households to entire cities. Waste would be virtually eliminated, with materials continuously recycled and repurposed. Food production could be localized and highly efficient, perhaps utilizing advanced hydroponics or even lab-grown protein.
Biotechnology and Biomimicry: The integration of biology and technology could lead to breakthroughs in areas like bioremediation, where engineered organisms clean up pollution and restore ecosystems. Biomimicry, where we learn from and imitate nature’s designs, could inspire the development of highly efficient and sustainable technologies.
Artificial Intelligence and Automation: AI could play a crucial role in optimizing resource use, managing complex systems like energy grids and transportation networks, and automating sustainable practices across industries. AI-powered tools could also help us understand and predict the long-term impacts of our actions on the environment.
Space-Based Resources: As humanity expands beyond Earth, access to resources from asteroids or even other planets could become increasingly important. Sustainable space mining and resource utilization would require advanced technologies and careful planning to avoid environmental damage.

3. Societal Shifts:

Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges like climate change and resource depletion will necessitate unprecedented levels of international cooperation. Global governance structures may evolve to manage shared resources and ensure equitable access to sustainable technologies.
Circular Economy: The concept of a circular economy, where resources are continuously reused and recycled, will likely become deeply ingrained in society. Consumerism as we know it may be replaced by a focus on durability, repairability, and sharing.
Conscious Consumption: Individuals may become more aware of the environmental impact of their choices and actively seek out sustainable products and services. Education and awareness campaigns could play a crucial role in fostering a culture of sustainability.
Decentralization: Sustainable technologies could empower local communities to become more self-sufficient in areas like energy production and food production. Decentralized systems could be more resilient and adaptable to changing conditions.

4. Ethical Considerations:

Technological Equity: Ensuring equitable access to sustainable technologies will be crucial to avoid exacerbating existing inequalities. The benefits of technological advancements should be shared by all, not just a privileged few.
Environmental Stewardship: As we gain the ability to manipulate the environment at a larger scale, we must be mindful of the potential consequences. Ethical frameworks will be needed to guide our actions and ensure that we act as responsible stewards of the planet.
Artificial Intelligence Governance: As AI becomes more powerful, we will need to develop ethical guidelines and regulations to ensure that it is used responsibly and for the benefit of humanity. AI should be a tool for promoting sustainability, not a threat to it.

5. Conclusion:

While the specific details of “Sustainable Technology of 3530” remain uncertain, the trends we observe today suggest a future where technology plays a central role in creating a more sustainable world. By embracing innovation, fostering global cooperation, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can pave the way for a future where both humanity and the planet thrive. This vision requires continuous research, development, and a deep commitment to the principles of sustainability.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

It’s fascinating to think about how sustainable technology might revolutionize industries in the distant future! While we can’t know for sure what industries will even exist in 3530, we can imagine how core principles of sustainability could be applied in some hypothetical scenarios:

1. Advanced Manufacturing:

Self-Replicating Factories: Imagine factories that can build themselves using advanced materials and AI-powered robotics. These factories could be highly adaptable, producing a wide range of products with minimal waste and energy consumption.
Personalized Production: Nanotechnology could enable on-demand manufacturing of customized products at the molecular level. This would eliminate the need for mass production and reduce waste from overproduction.
Zero-Waste Processes: Closed-loop systems could be implemented in all manufacturing processes, ensuring that all materials are reused or recycled. Factories could become self-contained ecosystems, minimizing their environmental footprint.

2. Energy Production and Distribution:

Global Energy Grid: A vast, interconnected network could distribute clean energy generated from a variety of sustainable sources, such as space-based solar power, fusion reactors, and geothermal plants. This grid could be self-regulating and highly resilient, ensuring a stable energy supply for everyone.
Localized Energy Generation: Microgrids powered by renewable energy sources could empower communities to become energy independent. Individuals might even have personal energy generators integrated into their homes or clothing.
Energy Storage: Advanced energy storage technologies could allow us to store vast amounts of energy and release it when needed. This would help to balance supply and demand and make renewable energy sources more reliable.

3. Resource Management:

Automated Recycling Systems: Highly efficient recycling systems could sort and process waste materials automatically, extracting valuable resources and minimizing landfill waste. These systems could even break down materials at the molecular level, allowing them to be reused in new products.
Resource Tracking: Advanced sensors and AI could track the flow of resources throughout the economy, identifying areas where waste can be reduced and efficiency can be improved. This could help to create a truly circular economy.
Sustainable Agriculture: Vertical farms and other advanced agricultural technologies could produce food in urban areas with minimal land use and water consumption. Genetically engineered crops could be more resilient to pests and diseases, reducing the need for pesticides and fertilizers.

4. Transportation:

Flying Personal Vehicles: Imagine personal aircraft powered by clean energy sources that can take off and land vertically. These vehicles could revolutionize transportation, reducing traffic congestion and making it easier to travel between cities.
Hyperloop Networks: High-speed transportation networks could connect cities and regions, allowing people to travel long distances quickly and efficiently. These networks could be powered by renewable energy and designed to minimize environmental impact.
Self-Driving Vehicles: AI-powered self-driving vehicles could optimize traffic flow and reduce accidents. These vehicles could also be shared, reducing the need for individual car ownership and minimizing parking space requirements.

5. Construction and Infrastructure:

Self-Healing Buildings: Buildings made from advanced materials could be self-healing, automatically repairing damage and extending their lifespan. This would reduce the need for maintenance and reconstruction, saving resources and reducing waste.
Adaptive Infrastructure: Infrastructure systems could be designed to adapt to changing environmental conditions, such as rising sea levels or extreme weather events. This would make our cities and communities more resilient to climate change.
Sustainable Materials: Construction materials could be made from recycled or renewable resources, reducing the environmental impact of building and infrastructure development.

These are just a few examples of how sustainable technology could be applied in industries of the future. The possibilities are vast, and the only limit is our imagination. By continuing to innovate and prioritize sustainability, we can create a world where technology helps us to live in harmony with the planet and ensures a thriving future for all.

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

It’s exciting to imagine the kind of research and development that might lead to sustainable technologies in the distant future! While we can’t know for sure what those technologies will be, we can speculate about the areas of focus and the approaches that might be taken:

1. Advanced Material Science:

Self-healing materials: Research into materials that can repair themselves at the molecular level, extending their lifespan and reducing waste. This could involve exploring new types of polymers, composites, and even metallic structures that can respond to damage and initiate repair processes.
Adaptive materials: Development of materials that can change their properties in response to environmental stimuli, such as temperature, light, or pressure. This could lead to buildings that can regulate their own temperature, or clothing that can adapt to changing weather conditions.
Biodegradable and programmable materials: Creation of materials that can be programmed at the molecular level to perform specific functions, and that can then biodegrade harmlessly at the end of their life cycle. This could revolutionize manufacturing, allowing for the creation of products that are both highly functional and environmentally friendly.

2. Energy Production and Storage:

Fusion energy: Continued research into fusion power, aiming to create a safe and efficient source of clean energy. This could involve exploring new reactor designs, plasma confinement techniques, and fuel sources.
Space-based solar power: Development of technologies to capture solar energy in space and transmit it back to Earth. This could involve building large solar arrays in orbit and developing efficient methods for transmitting energy wirelessly.
Advanced energy storage: Research into new types of batteries, fuel cells, and other energy storage devices that are more efficient, durable, and environmentally friendly. This could involve exploring new materials and electrochemical processes.

3. Biotechnology and Biomimicry:

Bio-integrated devices: Development of devices that can interact directly with living organisms, such as sensors that can monitor plant health or implants that can deliver drugs. This could involve combining biological materials with electronic components and developing new methods for interfacing with living systems.
Bioremediation: Engineering microorganisms that can break down pollutants and clean up contaminated environments. This could involve using genetic engineering to create organisms that are highly efficient at degrading specific pollutants.
Biomimetic materials: Creating materials that mimic the properties of natural materials, such as the strength of spider silk or the water resistance of lotus leaves. This could involve studying the structure and properties of natural materials and developing new methods for replicating them in the lab.

4. Artificial Intelligence and Automation:

AI for sustainable design: Developing AI algorithms that can design products and processes that are optimized for sustainability, taking into account factors such as resource use, energy consumption, and environmental impact.
AI for resource management: Using AI to track the flow of resources throughout the economy, identify areas where waste can be reduced, and optimize recycling and reuse processes.
AI for environmental monitoring: Developing AI-powered systems that can monitor the environment for signs of pollution, deforestation, or other environmental problems. This could involve using sensors, satellites, and other data sources to collect and analyze environmental data.

5. Social and Ethical Considerations:

Technology assessment: Developing frameworks for assessing the social and environmental impacts of new technologies, ensuring that they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.
Ethical AI: Researching the ethical implications of artificial intelligence and developing guidelines and regulations to ensure that AI is used in a way that is fair, transparent, and accountable.
Global governance: Exploring new models of global governance that can facilitate international cooperation on sustainability issues and ensure equitable access to sustainable technologies.

These are just a few examples of the research and development that might be needed to create sustainable technologies for the future. The challenges are significant, but the potential rewards are immense. By continuing to invest in research and innovation, we can pave the way for a future where technology helps us to live in harmony with the planet and ensures a thriving society for all.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

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.

Sustainable Technology of 3530 ?

White Paper: Envisioning Sustainable Technology in 3530

References

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply