Sustainable Technology of 3800

79 / 100

Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

Sustainable technology in 3800 would likely be vastly different from what we have today. Here are some speculative possibilities:

Energy: Fusion power may be a primary source, providing clean and abundant energy. Solar power from space-based platforms could also be significant.
Materials: Advanced materials science could lead to the use of self-healing, biodegradable, or even grown materials for construction and manufacturing.
Transportation: Flying cars or personal aircraft might be common, powered by clean energy sources. Hyperloops or other high-speed ground transportation could connect cities.
Agriculture: Vertical farms and lab-grown food could be widespread, reducing the need for land and water resources.
Waste Management: Advanced recycling and waste-to-energy technologies could minimize pollution and resource depletion.
Communication: Brain-computer interfaces or other advanced communication technologies could be prevalent.
Artificial Intelligence: AI could play a significant role in optimizing resource use and minimizing environmental impact.

It’s important to remember that this is just speculation. The actual sustainable technologies of 3800 could be very different.

What is Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

It’s impossible to say for sure what sustainable technology will look like in 3800. However, we can speculate based on current trends and potential future developments.

Here are some possibilities:

Energy: Fusion power may be a primary source, providing clean and abundant energy. Solar power from space-based platforms could also be significant.
Materials: Advanced materials science could lead to the use of self-healing, biodegradable, or even grown materials for construction and manufacturing.
Transportation: Flying cars or personal aircraft might be common, powered by clean energy sources. Hyperloops or other high-speed ground transportation could connect cities.
Agriculture: Vertical farms and lab-grown food could be widespread, reducing the need for land and water resources.
Waste Management: Advanced recycling and waste-to-energy technologies could minimize pollution and resource depletion.
Communication: Brain-computer interfaces or other advanced communication technologies could be prevalent.
Artificial Intelligence: AI could play a significant role in optimizing resource use and minimizing environmental impact.

It’s important to remember that this is just speculation. The actual sustainable technologies of 3800 could be very different.

Who is required Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

It’s tricky to answer who requires sustainable technology in 3800, as that implies a need we can’t fully comprehend. However, we can speculate on who would likely be involved with and benefit from it:

Everyone: In 3800, sustainable technology would likely be so integrated into daily life that everyone would rely on it for basic needs like energy, food, and shelter.
Future generations: The very existence of a thriving society in 3800 implies that past generations prioritized sustainability, ensuring resources and a healthy environment for those to come.
Governments and organizations: Entities responsible for infrastructure, resource management, and public well-being would be heavily invested in developing and maintaining sustainable technologies.
Scientists and engineers: These professionals would be at the forefront of innovation, constantly seeking ways to improve and adapt sustainable practices.
Industries: All sectors, from manufacturing to transportation, would need to operate within sustainable frameworks to minimize environmental impact.

Essentially, by 3800, sustainability would likely be a fundamental principle guiding all aspects of society, making it essential for everyone to participate in and benefit from it.

When is required Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

While it’s impossible to pinpoint an exact date for when sustainable technology will be “required” in 3800, we can explore the concept of necessity and how it might evolve:

Long-term survival: By 3800, it’s likely that unsustainable practices would have led to severe consequences, making sustainable technology absolutely essential for survival.
Resource scarcity: Depletion of finite resources would necessitate efficient and circular systems powered by sustainable technology.
Environmental limits: Exceeding planetary boundaries would force a shift towards technologies that minimize environmental impact.
Societal values: A culture that prioritizes well-being and long-term prosperity would likely demand sustainable solutions.

In essence, the “when” is less about a specific date and more about a gradual realization that sustainable technology is not just an option, but a fundamental requirement for a thriving future.

It’s also worth noting that the need for sustainable technology is not limited to 3800. It’s a growing imperative today as we face climate change, resource depletion, and other environmental challenges. The choices we make now will shape the world of 3800 and determine how crucial sustainable technology becomes for future generations.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

Where is required Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

This is a fascinating question that requires us to think beyond our current understanding of the world! Here are some thoughts on where sustainable technology might be essential in 3800:

Everywhere! By 3800, sustainable technology would likely be so integrated into society that it would be needed everywhere, from homes and cities to transportation systems and industrial facilities.
Urban centers: With potential population growth and urbanization, sustainable technologies would be crucial for managing resources, waste, and energy consumption in densely populated areas.
Remote areas: Even in remote locations, sustainable technologies would be needed to ensure access to resources and minimize environmental impact.
Space: If humanity has expanded beyond Earth, sustainable technologies would be essential for space travel, habitation, and resource utilization.
Extreme environments: In harsh environments like deserts, polar regions, or deep oceans, sustainable technologies could enable human survival and activity with minimal disruption to fragile ecosystems.

Essentially, the “where” is less about specific locations and more about the fundamental principle that sustainability would be a guiding factor in all aspects of life in 3800, shaping how we interact with our planet and beyond.

How is required Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

This is where it gets really interesting! How sustainable technology is required in 3800 depends on a few key factors:

The state of the planet: If environmental damage is severe, sustainable technology would be crucial for remediation and restoration.
Resource availability: Scarcity of resources would necessitate highly efficient technologies for extraction, utilization, and recycling.
Societal structure: A highly interconnected and globalized society would require sustainable technologies for communication, transportation, and resource sharing.
Technological advancement: The level of technological development in 3800 would influence the complexity and sophistication of sustainable solutions.

Here are some possible ways sustainable technology might be required in 3800:

Planetary-scale engineering: Technologies to manage climate, ocean currents, and even geological activity in a sustainable way.
Closed-loop systems: Highly efficient systems for resource use, waste management, and energy production that minimize environmental impact.
Biotechnology and synthetic biology: Using biological processes to create sustainable materials, fuels, and even food sources.
Artificial intelligence and automation: AI-driven systems to optimize resource use, predict environmental changes, and manage complex infrastructure.
Human augmentation: Technologies that enhance human capabilities in a sustainable way, such as improved resource efficiency or reduced environmental impact.

Ultimately, the “how” of sustainable technology in 3800 would be shaped by the specific challenges and opportunities faced by that society. It would likely involve a combination of advanced technologies, innovative practices, and a deep understanding of the interconnectedness between humanity and the environment.

Case study is Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

It’s tough to give a specific case study for sustainable technology in 3800, as it would be heavily speculative. However, we can create a hypothetical scenario based on current trends and potential future developments:

Case Study: The Integrated City-Biosphere of ‘Ecotopia’

Background: By 3800, many traditional cities have merged with surrounding ecosystems, forming integrated “city-biospheres.” Ecotopia is one such example, located in a formerly coastal region now partially submerged due to rising sea levels.

Sustainable Technologies in Use:

Energy: Ecotopia is powered by a combination of advanced fusion reactors and space-based solar arrays. Energy is distributed wirelessly throughout the city-biosphere.
Materials: Buildings are constructed from a combination of grown materials (bio-engineered wood and coral-like composites) and recycled resources. Self-healing materials are used for infrastructure to minimize maintenance and extend lifespan.
Food: Vertical farms integrated into buildings and underwater aquaculture provide food for the population. Lab-grown meat and other protein sources supplement traditional agriculture.
Water: Advanced filtration and recycling systems ensure clean water for all residents. Atmospheric water generation captures moisture from the air to supplement supplies.
Waste: A highly efficient circular economy system processes all waste. Organic waste is composted or used to produce biogas, while inorganic materials are recycled or repurposed.
Transportation: Ecotopia features a network of autonomous flying vehicles powered by clean energy. Underwater tunnels and high-speed rail connect to other city-biospheres.
Communication: Brain-computer interfaces allow seamless communication and access to information. AI assistants help manage daily tasks and optimize resource use.
Governance: AI systems assist in managing the city-biosphere, optimizing resource allocation, and predicting potential environmental challenges. Human councils make decisions based on data analysis and community input.

Challenges and Adaptations:

Sea level rise: Ecotopia has adapted to rising sea levels by incorporating floating structures and underwater habitats.
Climate change: The city-biosphere is designed to withstand extreme weather events and fluctuating temperatures.
Population growth: Ecotopia has implemented sustainable population management strategies to ensure resources are not overstretched.
Ecosystem preservation: Human activity is carefully managed to minimize impact on the surrounding environment. AI systems monitor ecosystem health and provide early warnings of potential problems.

Outcomes:

Thriving ecosystem: Ecotopia exists in harmony with its surrounding environment, supporting a rich biodiversity.
High quality of life: Residents enjoy access to clean energy, abundant resources, and advanced technologies.
Resilient society: Ecotopia is able to adapt to environmental challenges and ensure the well-being of its population.

This case study is just one possible vision of sustainable technology in 3800. The actual technologies and challenges faced by future societies could be very different. However, it highlights the potential for human ingenuity to create a world where technology and nature coexist in a sustainable way.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

White paper on Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3800: A Speculative Exploration

Abstract:

This white paper explores potential sustainable technologies that might exist in the year 3800. It acknowledges the highly speculative nature of such predictions, given the vast timescale involved, but aims to stimulate thought and discussion about the long-term trajectory of technological development and its crucial role in ensuring a sustainable future. The paper examines potential advancements in key areas like energy, materials, food production, waste management, transportation, communication, and governance, acknowledging the interconnectedness of these systems.

1. Introduction:

The year 3800 represents a significant temporal distance from our present. Predicting the precise nature of technology at such a remove is inherently challenging. However, by extrapolating current trends, considering potential paradigm shifts, and acknowledging the fundamental need for sustainability, we can construct plausible scenarios. This paper focuses on technologies that would likely be essential for a thriving civilization in 3800, emphasizing resource management, environmental preservation, and societal well-being.

2. Key Technological Domains:

2.1 Energy: Fusion power is a likely candidate for a primary energy source, offering clean, abundant, and safe energy. Space-based solar power platforms, potentially utilizing advanced light-harvesting technologies, could also contribute significantly. Nanotechnology might play a role in energy storage and transmission, enabling highly efficient and lossless systems.
2.2 Materials: Advanced materials science could lead to the widespread use of self-healing, biodegradable, or even grown materials. “Smart materials” with embedded sensors could optimize resource usage and adapt to changing conditions. Nanomaterials could revolutionize manufacturing processes, enabling precise control at the atomic level.
2.3 Food Production: Vertical farms and lab-grown food, including cultured meat and other protein sources, are likely to be commonplace. Precision agriculture, utilizing advanced sensors and AI, could optimize crop yields while minimizing resource inputs. Personalized nutrition, tailored to individual needs and genetic profiles, might be achievable through advanced biotechnology.
2.4 Waste Management: A truly circular economy, where waste is virtually eliminated, is a likely outcome. Advanced recycling and waste-to-energy technologies could transform waste into valuable resources. Nanotechnology might enable the breakdown of complex materials into their constituent components for reuse.
2.5 Transportation: Personal air mobility, powered by clean energy sources, could be prevalent. Hyperloops or other high-speed ground transportation systems could connect distant locations efficiently. Autonomous vehicles, both terrestrial and aerial, would likely be integrated into smart city infrastructure.
2.6 Communication: Brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) or other advanced communication technologies could be commonplace, enabling seamless information exchange and interaction. Holographic communication and augmented reality could transform social interactions and collaborative work.
2.7 Governance: AI could play a significant role in optimizing resource use, predicting environmental changes, and managing complex infrastructure. Decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) could facilitate transparent and participatory governance. Ethical considerations surrounding AI decision-making would be paramount.

3. Interconnectedness and Systemic Thinking:

The technologies described above are not isolated entities. They are interconnected and interdependent, forming a complex system. Sustainable technology in 3800 would necessitate a systemic approach, where the interactions between different technologies are carefully considered and optimized. AI and advanced modeling could play a crucial role in managing these complex systems.

4. Challenges and Considerations:

Ethical implications: The development and deployment of advanced technologies raise ethical concerns, particularly in areas like AI, biotechnology, and BCIs. Careful consideration of these issues is essential.
Environmental stewardship: Even with advanced technology, maintaining a healthy planet would require constant vigilance and proactive measures. Planetary-scale engineering, if feasible, could play a role in mitigating climate change and other environmental challenges.
Social equity: Ensuring equitable access to advanced technologies and their benefits would be crucial for social stability and well-being.
Resilience: Building resilience into technological systems and societal structures would be essential to withstand unforeseen events, such as natural disasters or technological failures.

5. Conclusion:

While predicting the future is an uncertain endeavor, exploring potential technological pathways is a valuable exercise. By considering the long-term needs of humanity and the planet, we can begin to shape a future where technology serves as a powerful tool for sustainability. The technologies envisioned for 3800, while seemingly futuristic, are rooted in current trends and emerging possibilities. By fostering innovation, promoting ethical considerations, and embracing systemic thinking, we can pave the way for a sustainable and prosperous future for generations to come.

Industrial application of Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

This is a really fun thought experiment! Imagining the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3800 requires us to think far beyond current capabilities. Here are some speculative ideas:

1. Advanced Materials Production:

Bio-factories: Imagine factories that “grow” materials using advanced biotechnology. These could produce everything from building materials to complex electronics, using renewable resources as feedstock.
Self-assembling nanobots: Nanobots could be programmed to assemble materials at the atomic level, creating objects with specific properties on demand. This could revolutionize manufacturing, allowing for highly customized and efficient production.
Recycling and resource reclamation: Industrial facilities could be designed to recover and reuse every single atom of material, creating a truly circular economy.

2. Energy Generation and Distribution:

Fusion power plants: Fusion reactors could provide clean and abundant energy for industrial processes. These plants might be smaller and more efficient than current designs, allowing for decentralized energy production.
Space-based solar power: Massive solar arrays in space could beam energy down to Earth, providing a continuous and reliable source of power for industry.
Wireless energy transmission: Factories could receive power wirelessly, eliminating the need for power lines and allowing for greater flexibility in facility placement.

3. Manufacturing and Production:

3D printing at the macro and nano scales: 3D printing could be used to create objects of any size and complexity, from massive industrial equipment to microscopic components. This could enable on-demand manufacturing and highly customized products.
AI-powered automation: AI systems could manage entire factories, optimizing production processes, predicting maintenance needs, and ensuring efficient resource use.
Closed-loop production systems: Industrial processes could be designed to minimize waste and pollution, with all byproducts being reused or recycled within the system.

4. Resource Extraction and Management:

Sustainable mining: Advanced technologies could be used to extract resources with minimal environmental impact, perhaps even using in-situ processing to reduce transportation needs.
Ocean mining: Robots and AI systems could sustainably harvest resources from the oceans, while minimizing disruption to marine ecosystems.
Atmospheric resource capture: Technologies could be developed to extract valuable resources from the atmosphere, such as rare earth elements or even water in arid regions.

5. Transportation and Logistics:

Autonomous vehicles: Self-driving trucks, ships, and aircraft could transport goods efficiently and sustainably, reducing the need for human operators and minimizing fuel consumption.
Hyperloops and other high-speed transport: High-speed transportation systems could connect industrial facilities across vast distances, enabling rapid movement of goods and materials.
Space-based logistics: For industries operating in space, sustainable transportation systems would be essential for moving resources and products between Earth and other celestial bodies.

Important Considerations:

Environmental impact: Even with advanced technology, it would be crucial to carefully assess and minimize the environmental impact of industrial activities.
Social implications: The widespread use of automation and AI could have significant social implications, requiring careful planning and policies to ensure a just and equitable transition.
Ethical considerations: The development and use of advanced technologies raise ethical questions that must be addressed to ensure they are used responsibly and for the benefit of humanity.

It’s important to remember that these are just speculative ideas. The actual industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3800 could be very different. However, by thinking creatively about the possibilities, we can begin to imagine a future where technology and industry work in harmony with the environment to create a sustainable and prosperous world.

Research and development of Sustainable Technology of 3800 ?

Research and development (R&D) in sustainable technology for 3800 would be a complex and multifaceted endeavor, building upon current scientific knowledge and pushing the boundaries of what’s possible. Here’s a glimpse into potential R&D areas:

1. Fundamental Science:

Advanced Physics: Exploring the fundamental laws of the universe to unlock new energy sources (like harnessing zero-point energy) or manipulate gravity for transportation.
Quantum Computing: Developing powerful quantum computers to simulate complex systems, design new materials, and optimize energy grids.
Consciousness Research: Investigating the nature of consciousness to understand its relationship to AI and potentially develop more ethical and human-centered technologies.

2. Materials Science:

Programmable Matter: Creating materials that can change their properties on demand, enabling dynamic structures and adaptive technologies.
Bio-integrated Materials: Developing materials that can seamlessly integrate with living organisms, potentially for medical applications or even “growing” infrastructure.
Extreme Condition Materials: Designing materials that can withstand extreme temperatures, pressures, or radiation, for use in space or deep-sea exploration.

3. Energy Technologies:

Fusion Energy: Achieving stable and efficient fusion power, potentially through new confinement methods or fuel cycles.
Space-Based Solar: Developing highly efficient and cost-effective ways to capture solar energy in space and transmit it to Earth.
Advanced Energy Storage: Creating energy storage solutions with vastly higher capacity and density than current batteries, enabling long-duration power and off-grid applications.

4. Biotechnology and Synthetic Biology:

Synthetic Life: Creating artificial life forms to perform specific tasks, such as producing biofuels, cleaning up pollution, or even terraforming other planets.
Genetic Engineering: Developing advanced gene editing techniques to enhance human capabilities, create disease-resistant crops, or even engineer new organisms with desired traits.
Biomanufacturing: Using biological systems to produce materials, chemicals, and even complex devices, potentially revolutionizing manufacturing processes.

5. Artificial Intelligence and Robotics:

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI): Developing AI systems with human-level intelligence, capable of problem-solving, creativity, and self-improvement.
Swarm Robotics: Creating large networks of interconnected robots that can work together to perform complex tasks, such as construction, resource extraction, or environmental monitoring.
Human-Robot Collaboration: Designing robots that can seamlessly collaborate with humans, augmenting our abilities and enabling new forms of interaction.

6. Planetary-Scale Engineering:

Climate Engineering: Developing technologies to mitigate climate change, such as carbon capture, solar radiation management, or cloud seeding.
Ecosystem Restoration: Creating methods to restore damaged ecosystems, potentially even reversing the effects of pollution or deforestation.
Space Colonization: Researching and developing technologies for long-term human habitation in space, including closed-loop life support systems and resource utilization.

7. Social and Ethical Considerations:

Technology Governance: Developing frameworks for the ethical development and deployment of advanced technologies, ensuring they are used for the benefit of humanity.
Social Impact Assessment: Studying the potential social and economic impacts of new technologies, to anticipate and mitigate any negative consequences.
Human-Technology Interface: Researching how humans interact with advanced technologies, to design systems that are user-friendly, safe, and enhance human capabilities.

Research Methods:

Interdisciplinary Collaboration: R&D in sustainable technology would require collaboration between scientists, engineers, social scientists, and ethicists.
Computational Modeling: Advanced computer simulations would be used to model complex systems and predict the behavior of new technologies.
Experimental Research: Laboratory and field experiments would be conducted to test new ideas and validate theoretical models.
International Cooperation: Global collaboration would be essential to share knowledge, resources, and expertise.

It’s important to remember that this is just a speculative look at potential R&D areas. The actual research priorities in 3800 would depend on the specific challenges and opportunities faced by that society. However, it’s clear that R&D in sustainable technology would be a crucial driver of progress, shaping the future of humanity and the planet.

COURTESY Tech Evaluate

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.