Sustainable technology of 3880

Leave a Comment / Sustainable technology of 3880 / By
69 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

It’s impossible to predict with certainty what sustainable technology will look like in the year 3880. However, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and potential future developments:

Possible Trends and Developments:

  • Advanced Energy Systems: By 3880, it’s likely that humanity will have developed highly efficient and sustainable energy systems, potentially including fusion power, advanced solar energy capture, and other forms of renewable energy we can’t even imagine yet.
  • Closed-Loop Resource Management: Technologies for complete recycling and reuse of resources will likely be highly advanced, minimizing waste and pollution. This could involve molecular manufacturing or other forms of advanced material science.
  • Ecological Integration: Technologies that seamlessly integrate human activities with natural ecosystems could be commonplace. This might include advanced forms of biomimicry, ecological restoration, and even terraforming.
  • Climate Engineering: Sophisticated technologies for managing and even reversing climate change might be developed, allowing for precise control of the Earth’s climate.
  • Space-Based Solutions: With potential space colonization or large-scale space-based industries, sustainable technologies for resource extraction, manufacturing, and energy production in space could be crucial.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Unforeseen Discoveries: New scientific discoveries could lead to entirely new forms of sustainable technology that we cannot even conceive of today.
  • Ethical Considerations: As technology advances, ethical considerations around its use will become even more critical. Ensuring that sustainable technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all will be a major challenge.
  • Adaptability: Sustainable technologies of the future will need to be highly adaptable to changing environmental conditions and resource availability.

Overall:

While it’s impossible to know for sure what sustainable technology will look like in 3880, it’s likely that it will be far more advanced and integrated with natural systems than anything we have today. The challenges of sustainability will remain, but hopefully, humanity will have developed the tools and wisdom to address them effectively.

What is Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

Predicting the exact nature of sustainable technology in 3880 is impossible, but here are some educated guesses based on current trends:

Possible Trends and Developments:

  • Advanced Energy Systems: Fusion power, advanced solar energy capture, and other forms of renewable energy we can’t even imagine yet.
  • Closed-Loop Resource Management: Technologies for complete recycling and reuse of resources, potentially including molecular manufacturing or other forms of advanced material science.
  • Ecological Integration: Technologies that seamlessly integrate human activities with natural ecosystems, including advanced forms of biomimicry, ecological restoration, and even terraforming.
  • Climate Engineering: Sophisticated technologies for managing and even reversing climate change, allowing for precise control of the Earth’s climate.
  • Space-Based Solutions: Sustainable technologies for resource extraction, manufacturing, and energy production in space could be crucial with potential space colonization or large-scale space-based industries.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Unforeseen Discoveries: New scientific discoveries could lead to entirely new forms of sustainable technology that we cannot even conceive of today.
  • Ethical Considerations: Ensuring that sustainable technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all will be a major challenge.
  • Adaptability: Sustainable technologies of the future will need to be highly adaptable to changing environmental conditions and resource availability.

Overall:

It’s likely that sustainable technology in 3880 will be far more advanced and integrated with natural systems than anything we have today. The challenges of sustainability will remain, but hopefully, humanity will have developed the tools and wisdom to address them effectively.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

It’s difficult to say definitively who will require sustainable technology in 3880, as that implies a level of prediction about societal structures and governance that’s beyond our current capacity. However, we can identify who will likely need it and who will be most impacted by its development:

Those who will likely need sustainable technology in 3880:

  • Humanity as a whole: Regardless of how society is organized, sustainable technology will be essential for human survival and well-being in the face of potential environmental challenges, resource limitations, and the need for long-term ecological balance.
  • Future generations: Those living in 3880 and beyond will inherit the consequences of decisions made today. They will rely on sustainable technologies to maintain a habitable planet and a thriving civilization.
  • Ecosystems and the natural world: Sustainable technology will be crucial for protecting and preserving biodiversity, maintaining ecological balance, and mitigating the impacts of human activities on the environment.

Those who will be most impacted by the development of sustainable technology:

  • Scientists and engineers: They will be at the forefront of developing and implementing sustainable technologies, pushing the boundaries of scientific knowledge and innovation.
  • Policymakers and leaders: They will play a crucial role in shaping the direction of technological development and ensuring that it is used responsibly and ethically.
  • Individuals and communities: Everyone will be affected by the availability and accessibility of sustainable technologies, which will shape their daily lives, livelihoods, and interactions with the environment.

It’s important to remember:

  • Interconnectedness: The need for sustainable technology is interconnected with social, economic, and political factors. Its development will be influenced by and will in turn influence these factors.
  • Ethical considerations: The development and use of sustainable technology must be guided by ethical principles, ensuring that it benefits all of humanity and does not exacerbate existing inequalities.
  • Continuous evolution: Sustainable technology will continue to evolve and adapt to changing needs and challenges. It will require ongoing research, innovation, and collaboration.

In conclusion, while we cannot predict who will require sustainable technology in 3880, it is clear that its development will be essential for the well-being of humanity and the planet. It will be a collective endeavor, requiring the participation and responsibility of individuals, communities, and leaders across the globe.

When is required Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

While it’s impossible to pinpoint an exact date for when sustainable technology will be “required” in 3880, it’s safe to say that the need for it will be ongoing and ever-increasing. Here’s a breakdown of why:

  • Continuous Need: The challenges that sustainable technology aims to address – climate change, resource depletion, pollution, etc. – are not one-time events. They require continuous effort and adaptation. So, the need for sustainable technology in 3880 will be a continuation of the need that exists today and will continue to grow in the coming centuries.  
  • Evolution of Challenges: It’s likely that new environmental and social challenges will emerge by 3880. Sustainable technology will need to evolve and adapt to these new challenges, making its ongoing development and implementation crucial.
  • Dependence on Past Actions: The state of the world in 3880 will be heavily influenced by the actions taken in the centuries leading up to it. If sustainable practices are not adopted widely and effectively in the near future, the challenges faced in 3880 could be even more severe, making the need for sustainable technology even more urgent.

In essence:

The “when” for sustainable technology is not a single point in time, but rather an ongoing and ever-present necessity. It’s a continuous process of development, implementation, and adaptation that will be crucial for the long-term well-being of humanity and the planet.

Think of it this way:

Imagine a society living in a house. They need to constantly maintain the house to keep it habitable. They need to fix leaks, repair the roof, and ensure there’s a functioning energy source. Sustainable technology is like the tools and methods they use to maintain their “house” – the planet. The need for those tools and methods is constant, not just something needed at a specific point in time.

Therefore, while we can’t say exactly when sustainable technology will be “required” in 3880, we can be certain that its development and use will be essential for navigating the challenges of that time and ensuring a sustainable future.

COURTESY : Voith Group

Where is required Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

This is a fascinating question that requires us to think about the interconnectedness of technology, society, and the environment in the distant future! Here are some thoughts on where sustainable technology might be “required” in 3880:

1. Everywhere!

  • It’s highly likely that by 3880, sustainable technology will be deeply integrated into all aspects of life. This means it will be needed in:
    • Cities and homes: For energy, water management, waste disposal, transportation, and construction.
    • Industries: For manufacturing, resource extraction, and production of goods.
    • Agriculture: For food production, ensuring healthy soil and water resources.
    • Transportation: For moving people and goods efficiently and with minimal environmental impact.  
    • Communication and information technology: For powering data centers and networks sustainably.

2. Beyond Earth:

  • If humanity has expanded beyond Earth by 3880, sustainable technology will be even more critical for:
    • Space habitats and colonies: Creating closed-loop life support systems, generating energy, and utilizing resources available in space.  
    • Space exploration and travel: Developing propulsion systems that minimize environmental impact and utilizing resources found in space.  
    • Terraforming (if possible): Transforming other planets to make them habitable for humans, requiring careful management of resources and ecosystems.

3. In the face of challenges:

  • Sustainable technology will be especially crucial in regions facing specific challenges:
    • Areas with limited resources: Developing technologies for efficient resource use and recycling.
    • Regions vulnerable to climate change: Implementing solutions for adapting to changing conditions and mitigating the impacts of climate change.
    • Ecosystems under stress: Utilizing technology for ecological restoration and conservation.

Important considerations:

  • Global interconnectedness: The need for sustainable technology will be a global concern, as environmental challenges and resource limitations will likely affect all regions.
  • Social equity: Sustainable technology should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their location or socioeconomic status.
  • Ethical considerations: The development and use of sustainable technology must be guided by ethical principles, ensuring that it benefits all of humanity and does not harm the environment.  

In conclusion, by 3880, sustainable technology will likely be an indispensable part of human civilization, essential for survival, well-being, and the ability to thrive on Earth and potentially beyond.Sources and related content

How is required Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

It’s impossible to know the exact “how” behind the need for sustainable technology in 3880, as that depends on a complex interplay of factors we can only speculate about. However, we can explore some potential scenarios and how they might drive the need:

1. Resource Depletion and Environmental Degradation:

  • Scenario: Continued unsustainable practices over centuries lead to severe resource scarcity, widespread pollution, and ecological collapse.
  • How it drives the need: Sustainable technology becomes essential for basic survival. This could involve radical resource efficiency, closed-loop systems, alternative energy sources, and technologies to remediate environmental damage.

2. Climate Change Impacts:

  • Scenario: Even with mitigation efforts, the long-term effects of climate change continue to unfold, leading to extreme weather events, sea-level rise, and disruptions to ecosystems.  
  • How it drives the need: Sustainable technology is crucial for adaptation and resilience. This might include climate engineering, resilient infrastructure, advanced agriculture, and technologies to manage displacement and resource scarcity.

3. Population Growth and Urbanization:

  • Scenario: The global population continues to grow, and urbanization trends concentrate people in megacities, putting immense pressure on resources and infrastructure.  
  • How it drives the need: Sustainable technology is essential for managing urban environments, providing clean energy and water, ensuring food security, and minimizing waste and pollution in densely populated areas.

4. Technological Advancement and New Challenges:

  • Scenario: New technologies emerge that pose their own sustainability challenges. For example, advanced materials or nanotechnology might have unforeseen environmental impacts.
  • How it drives the need: Sustainable technology is needed to mitigate the risks of new technologies and ensure they are used responsibly. This requires ongoing research, ethical considerations, and adaptive solutions.

5. Interplanetary Expansion:

  • Scenario: Humanity has expanded beyond Earth, establishing settlements and industries in space.
  • How it drives the need: Sustainable technology is crucial for creating closed-loop life support systems, utilizing extraterrestrial resources, and minimizing the environmental impact of space activities.

Important Considerations:

  • Interconnectedness: These scenarios are not mutually exclusive. They can interact and compound each other, creating complex challenges that require multifaceted solutions.
  • Social and Political Factors: The “how” behind the need for sustainable technology is also shaped by social, economic, and political factors. Inequality, conflict, and lack of cooperation can exacerbate environmental challenges and hinder the development and implementation of sustainable solutions.  
  • Unpredictability: The future is inherently unpredictable. New challenges and opportunities may arise that we cannot foresee today. Sustainable technology must be adaptable and resilient to these unforeseen circumstances.

In conclusion, the “how” behind the need for sustainable technology in 3880 is likely to be a complex and evolving story, shaped by a multitude of factors. However, it’s clear that the need will be driven by the ongoing challenges of maintaining a habitable planet and ensuring the well-being of humanity in the face of environmental change, resource limitations, and the impacts of human activities.Sources and related content

Case study is Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

It’s tricky to create a specific case study for sustainable technology in 3880, as that would involve detailed predictions about a future we can only imagine. However, we can build a hypothetical case study based on current trends and potential developments:

Case Study: The Integrated Resource City of Aurora, 3880

Background:

By 3880, many cities have transitioned to a model of “Integrated Resource Cities” (IRCs). These are urban centers designed for complete resource self-sufficiency and minimal environmental impact. Aurora is a leading example.

Sustainable Technologies in Focus:

  • Advanced Energy Systems: Aurora is powered by a combination of:
    • Fusion Power: A compact fusion reactor provides clean, abundant energy.  
    • Space-Based Solar: Solar energy is collected in space and beamed down to the city.
    • Geothermal: Deep geothermal plants tap into the Earth’s heat for a stable energy source.  
  • Closed-Loop Resource Management:
    • Molecular Recycling: Advanced nanotechnology allows for the complete breakdown and reuse of materials, eliminating waste.
    • Vertical Farming: Multi-level vertical farms within the city produce food efficiently, minimizing land use and transportation needs.
    • Water Reclamation: Sophisticated systems purify and recycle all water used in the city.  
  • Ecological Integration:
    • Biomimetic Architecture: Buildings are designed to mimic natural systems, incorporating green spaces and maximizing energy efficiency.
    • Urban Ecosystems: The city integrates natural habitats and green corridors to support biodiversity and ecological balance.
    • Climate Regulation: Aurora utilizes advanced climate control technologies to maintain optimal conditions and mitigate the impacts of climate change.

Challenges and Solutions:

  • Maintaining Technological Infrastructure: Ensuring the long-term maintenance and adaptability of complex technologies requires ongoing research and development.
  • Social Equity: Ensuring that the benefits of sustainable technology are distributed equitably among all residents is a continuous challenge.
  • Adapting to Change: The city must be prepared to adapt to unforeseen environmental changes, technological advancements, and social needs.

Outcomes:

  • Environmental Sustainability: Aurora has a minimal ecological footprint, contributing to a healthy planet.
  • Resource Security: The city is self-sufficient in terms of energy, water, and essential resources.
  • Quality of Life: Residents enjoy a high quality of life with access to clean air, green spaces, and sustainable resources.

Lessons Learned:

  • Long-term Vision: Sustainable technology requires a long-term perspective and commitment to continuous improvement.
  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Integrating diverse fields of science, engineering, and social sciences is essential for developing effective solutions.
  • Ethical Considerations: Ethical principles must guide the development and use of sustainable technology to ensure a just and equitable future.

Note: This is a hypothetical case study. The actual sustainable technologies of 3880 may differ significantly. However, it highlights the potential for advanced technology to create a more sustainable future.Sources and related content

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

White paper on Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 3880: A Glimpse into the Future

Abstract:

Predicting the precise nature of sustainable technology in 3880 is an exercise in informed speculation. This white paper explores potential trends and developments based on current scientific trajectories and societal needs, painting a plausible picture of a future where advanced technology is deeply integrated with ecological balance. It acknowledges the inherent uncertainties while highlighting the crucial role of continuous innovation, ethical considerations, and global cooperation in achieving a truly sustainable future.

1. Introduction:

The pursuit of sustainability is an ongoing journey, not a destination. While we grapple with present-day challenges, it’s vital to envision the long-term future and anticipate the technological landscape that will shape it. This paper offers a speculative exploration of sustainable technology in 3880, recognizing the limitations of prediction while emphasizing the importance of forward-thinking.

2. Projected Technological Advancements:

Several key technological areas are likely to experience transformative advancements by 3880:

  • Energy: Fusion power, space-based solar energy, and advanced geothermal systems could provide clean, abundant energy. Potentially, entirely new energy sources, currently beyond our comprehension, may be discovered. Micro-grids and localized energy generation will likely be highly efficient and adaptable.
  • Resource Management: Molecular nanotechnology and advanced recycling techniques could enable near-total resource recovery and reuse. Closed-loop systems for water, materials, and even nutrients will be commonplace, drastically minimizing waste.
  • Manufacturing: Advanced material science, potentially including programmable matter, could revolutionize manufacturing processes, allowing for on-demand production with minimal environmental impact. Localized, personalized manufacturing might be the norm.
  • Agriculture: Vertical farming, precision agriculture, and lab-grown food production will likely be highly optimized, ensuring food security with minimal land use and environmental impact. Personalized nutrition based on individual biomes might be possible.
  • Environmental Remediation: Advanced techniques for carbon capture, climate engineering, and ecological restoration could be deployed to manage and reverse environmental damage. Geoengineering may have advanced to the point of delicate, localized ecosystem management.
  • Information and Communication: Quantum computing and other advanced information technologies could enable highly efficient data processing and communication, while minimizing energy consumption. AI could play a crucial role in optimizing resource use and managing complex systems.  
  • Space-Based Technologies: With potential space colonization or large-scale space-based industries, sustainable technologies for resource extraction, manufacturing, and energy production in space could be crucial. Space-based solar farms and asteroid mining could be realities.

3. Societal and Ethical Considerations:

Technological advancement alone is insufficient for achieving sustainability. Ethical considerations and societal structures play a crucial role:

  • Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges like climate change and resource scarcity will require unprecedented levels of international collaboration and shared responsibility.
  • Equity and Access: Ensuring equitable access to sustainable technologies and their benefits will be essential to prevent exacerbating existing inequalities.
  • Governance and Regulation: Robust governance frameworks will be needed to guide the development and use of advanced technologies, preventing unintended consequences and ensuring ethical practices.  
  • Human-Technology Integration: The relationship between humans and technology will likely evolve significantly. Understanding and managing this relationship will be critical for ensuring human well-being.

4. Challenges and Uncertainties:

Several challenges and uncertainties remain:

  • Unforeseen Discoveries: New scientific discoveries could lead to entirely new forms of sustainable technology, or conversely, introduce new challenges.
  • Adaptability: Sustainable technologies must be adaptable to changing environmental conditions, resource availability, and societal needs.
  • Long-Term Maintenance: Ensuring the long-term maintenance and viability of complex technological systems will be a significant challenge.

5. Conclusion:

While predicting the future is inherently speculative, it’s clear that sustainable technology will be essential for human civilization in 3880. By fostering innovation, prioritizing ethical considerations, and promoting global cooperation, we can pave the way for a future where technology and nature coexist in harmony, ensuring a thriving planet for generations to come. The journey towards that future begins today.Sources and related content

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

It’s fascinating to imagine the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 3880! Here are some possibilities, extrapolating from current trends and potential future breakthroughs:

1. Advanced Manufacturing and Resource Management:

  • Molecular Manufacturing: Imagine factories that can create products atom by atom, with precise control over material properties and minimal waste. This could revolutionize industries from construction to electronics, allowing for on-demand production of highly customized goods with near-zero environmental impact.
  • Closed-Loop Production Systems: Industries could operate on closed-loop systems where all materials are continuously recycled and reused. This would eliminate waste and pollution, significantly reducing the environmental footprint of manufacturing.  
  • Adaptive Materials: Materials that can change their properties in response to environmental stimuli could be used in construction, transportation, and other industries. This could lead to self-healing structures, adaptive infrastructure, and products that can be easily repurposed or recycled.  

2. Energy and Resource Industries:

  • Fusion Power Plants: Fusion energy, if realized, could provide a clean and virtually limitless source of power for industries of all kinds. This could revolutionize energy-intensive sectors like manufacturing, mining, and transportation.  
  • Space-Based Resource Extraction: If humanity expands into space, industries could utilize resources from asteroids or other celestial bodies. Sustainable technologies would be crucial for extracting and processing these resources with minimal environmental impact on Earth or in space.  
  • Advanced Geothermal Energy: Deep geothermal plants could tap into the Earth’s heat to provide a stable and sustainable source of energy for industries located anywhere on the planet.

3. Agriculture and Food Production:

  • Vertical Farms and Controlled Environment Agriculture: Industries could utilize advanced vertical farming techniques and controlled environment agriculture to produce food efficiently in urban areas or even in space. This could reduce the need for land, water, and pesticides, while ensuring food security for growing populations.
  • Precision Agriculture and Automation: Advanced sensors, robotics, and AI could be used to optimize agricultural practices, reducing resource use and minimizing environmental impact. This could lead to more sustainable and efficient food production systems.  
  • Cellular Agriculture: The production of meat and other animal products from cell cultures could become widespread, reducing the environmental footprint of traditional animal agriculture.

4. Transportation and Infrastructure:

  • Sustainable Transportation Systems: Industries could rely on highly efficient and sustainable transportation systems, such as maglev trains, autonomous electric vehicles, and even advanced air transport, minimizing pollution and congestion.
  • Smart Infrastructure: Infrastructure systems could be equipped with sensors and AI to optimize resource use, predict maintenance needs, and adapt to changing environmental conditions. This could lead to more resilient and sustainable infrastructure.  

5. Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing:

  • Biomanufacturing: Industries could utilize biological systems to produce a wide range of products, from materials to pharmaceuticals, with minimal environmental impact. This could lead to the development of new sustainable materials and manufacturing processes.  
  • Bioremediation: Industries could use biological processes to clean up pollution and restore damaged ecosystems. This could be crucial for addressing environmental challenges and creating a healthier planet.  

Important Considerations:

  • Interconnectedness: These industrial applications are likely to be interconnected, with advancements in one area driving innovation in others.
  • Ethical Considerations: The development and use of these technologies must be guided by ethical principles, ensuring that they benefit all of humanity and do not harm the environment.
  • Adaptability: Industries must be prepared to adapt to changing environmental conditions, resource availability, and technological advancements.

By embracing sustainable technologies and prioritizing ethical considerations, industries in 3880 could play a crucial role in creating a more sustainable and prosperous future for all.Sources and related content

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 3880 ?

Research and development (R&D) in sustainable technology for 3880 will be a continuous, evolving process building upon current scientific advancements and addressing future challenges. Here’s how it might unfold:

1. Foundational Research (Now – 2100):

  • Fundamental Science: Continued exploration of fundamental physics, chemistry, biology, and materials science will lay the groundwork for future breakthroughs. This includes areas like:
    • Advanced energy generation (fusion, antimatter, etc.)
    • Nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing
    • Biotechnology and synthetic biology
    • Quantum computing and information science
  • Sustainability Science: Interdisciplinary research will focus on understanding complex Earth systems, climate change, resource cycles, and human-environment interactions. This will provide the knowledge base for developing sustainable solutions.

2. Applied Research and Development (2100 – 3000):

  • Technology Development: Building upon foundational research, scientists and engineers will develop and refine specific sustainable technologies, including:
    • Advanced energy systems
    • Closed-loop resource management systems
    • Ecological restoration and climate engineering techniques
    • Sustainable manufacturing and agriculture
    • Space-based technologies
  • Systems Integration: Research will focus on integrating different technologies into comprehensive systems, such as smart cities, sustainable infrastructure, and global resource networks.

3. Long-Term Development and Adaptation (3000 – 3880):

  • Continuous Improvement: Ongoing research and development will focus on improving the efficiency, adaptability, and resilience of sustainable technologies. This includes:
    • Optimizing energy production and resource use
    • Developing new materials and manufacturing processes
    • Adapting to changing environmental conditions
    • Addressing ethical and social implications
  • Exploration and Innovation: Scientists and engineers will continue to explore new frontiers, pushing the boundaries of knowledge and developing innovative solutions to emerging challenges. This could involve:
    • Discovering new energy sources
    • Developing advanced forms of artificial intelligence
    • Expanding human presence in space

Key Aspects of R&D:

  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Collaboration among scientists, engineers, social scientists, and other experts will be crucial for addressing complex sustainability challenges. 1   1. STEM research and interdisciplinary collaboration: Creating a synergy that sparks innovation and increased participation – National Science Foundation new.nsf.gov
  • Global Cooperation: International collaboration will be essential for sharing knowledge, coordinating research efforts, and ensuring equitable access to sustainable technologies.
  • Ethical Considerations: Ethical principles must guide the development and use of sustainable technologies, ensuring that they benefit all of humanity and do not harm the environment.
  • Adaptive Approach: R&D must be adaptable to changing environmental conditions, resource availability, and societal needs.

Looking Ahead:

The research and development of sustainable technology for 3880 is a long-term endeavor that requires sustained effort, creativity, and a commitment to a sustainable future. By investing in foundational research, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration, and prioritizing ethical considerations, we can pave the way for a future where technology and nature coexist in harmony.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

References

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

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »