Sustainable technology of 4650

Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

The query “sustainable technology of 4650” could be interpreted in two ways:

Sustainable technology in the year 4650: This interpretation refers to the future and is speculative. It would involve making predictions about technological advancements and societal priorities centuries from now.
Sustainable technology related to the number 4650: This interpretation could refer to a specific product, model, or technology with the number 4650 in its name or designation. It could also refer to a technology with a technical specification or measurement related to the number 4650.

For the first interpretation, it’s impossible to know what sustainable technology will look like in the year 4650. However, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and challenges:

Energy: It’s likely that renewable energy sources will be dominant, and technologies for energy storage and distribution will be highly advanced.
Materials: Sustainable materials and manufacturing processes will be crucial, with a focus on recycling, biodegradability, and reducing waste.
Resource management: Technologies for water purification, waste management, and resource recovery will be essential for maintaining a sustainable environment.
Agriculture: Sustainable agriculture practices and technologies will be needed to feed a growing population while minimizing environmental impact.
Transportation: Electric and autonomous vehicles may be widely adopted, along with advanced transportation systems that reduce congestion and emissions.

For the second interpretation, it’s unclear what specific technology or product the number 4650 refers to. However, we can consider some possibilities:

Product model: It could be a model number for a specific product, such as a solar panel, wind turbine, or electric vehicle. In this case, the sustainable features of the product would depend on its specific design and technology.
Technical specification: It could refer to a specific measurement or technical parameter, such as the power output of a solar panel (e.g., 4650 watts) or the capacity of a battery (e.g., 4650 watt-hours). In this case, the sustainability aspect would depend on the overall efficiency and environmental impact of the technology.
Code or designation: It could be a code or designation used in a specific industry or field, such as a building standard or a certification for sustainable products. In this case, the sustainability criteria would be defined by the relevant standards or regulations.

To provide a more specific answer, it would be helpful to have more context about the technology or product in question.

What is Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

The query “sustainable technology of 4650” could be interpreted in two ways:

Sustainable technology in the year 4650: This interpretation refers to the future and is speculative. It would involve making predictions about technological advancements and societal priorities centuries from now.
Sustainable technology related to the number 4650: This interpretation could refer to a specific product, model, or technology with the number 4650 in its name or designation. It could also refer to a technology with a technical specification or measurement related to the number 4650.

Energy: It’s likely that renewable energy sources will be dominant, and technologies for energy storage and distribution will be highly advanced.
Materials: Sustainable materials and manufacturing processes will be crucial, with a focus on recycling, biodegradability, and reducing waste.
Resource management: Technologies for water purification, waste management, and resource recovery will be essential for maintaining a sustainable environment.
Agriculture: Sustainable agriculture practices and technologies will be needed to feed a growing population while minimizing environmental impact.
Transportation: Electric and autonomous vehicles may be widely adopted, along with advanced transportation systems that reduce congestion and emissions.

For the second interpretation, it’s unclear what specific technology or product the number 4650 refers to. However, we can consider some possibilities:

Product model: It could be a model number for a specific product, such as a solar panel, wind turbine, or electric vehicle. In this case, the sustainable features of the product would depend on its specific design and technology.
Technical specification: It could refer to a specific measurement or technical parameter, such as the power output of a solar panel (e.g., 4650 watts) or the capacity of a battery (e.g., 4650 watt-hours). In this case, the sustainability aspect would depend on the overall efficiency and environmental impact of the technology.
Code or designation: It could be a code or designation used in a specific industry or field, such as a building standard or a certification for sustainable products. In this case, the sustainability criteria would be defined by the relevant standards or regulations.

To provide a more specific answer, it would be helpful to have more context about the technology or product in question.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

It seems you’re asking about who would need or benefit from sustainable technology in the year 4650. While we can’t definitively know what society will be like then, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and challenges:

In the year 4650, it’s likely that everyone would be reliant on and benefit from sustainable technology. Here’s why:

Resource Scarcity: If current trends continue, natural resources will likely be even more scarce than they are today. Sustainable technologies will be essential for managing resources like water, energy, and materials.
Environmental Degradation: Climate change and pollution could make large parts of the planet uninhabitable. Sustainable technologies will be crucial for mitigating these effects and creating a livable environment.
Population Growth: The global population may continue to grow, requiring sustainable agriculture, infrastructure, and resource management to support everyone.
Technological Advancement: Technology will likely continue to advance, and sustainable practices will need to be integrated into all new technologies to ensure they don’t further harm the planet.

Here are some specific groups who would particularly rely on sustainable technology in 4650:

Future Generations: They will inherit the consequences of our actions (or inaction) today. Sustainable technology will be essential for ensuring they have a habitable planet with sufficient resources.
Developing Nations: These regions may be disproportionately affected by climate change and resource scarcity. Sustainable technology can help them adapt and build resilient infrastructure.
Vulnerable Populations: The poor, elderly, and those with disabilities may be more vulnerable to the effects of environmental degradation. Sustainable technology can help ensure their basic needs are met.
Industries: All industries, from agriculture to manufacturing to transportation, will need to adopt sustainable practices to remain viable and avoid depleting resources.

In essence, sustainable technology in 4650 will be a necessity for human survival and well-being. It will need to be integrated into every aspect of life to ensure a healthy planet and a thriving society.

It’s important to remember that this is all speculation. The future is uncertain, and the challenges we face may change over time. However, by investing in sustainable technology today, we can increase the chances of a positive future for all.

When is required Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

The question “When is sustainable technology of 4650 required?” is a bit tricky because it mixes a time (4650) with a concept (sustainable technology). It’s not about when in the sense of a specific date, but rather when in the sense of a need arising.

Here’s how we can break down the answer:

The year 4650 is a placeholder for a distant future. We don’t know what the world will be like then. However, the question implies a future where the need for sustainable technology is paramount.
The need for sustainable technology is now and increasingly urgent. We don’t need to wait until 4650. The problems that sustainable technology addresses—climate change, resource depletion, pollution—are already impacting us. The longer we delay, the more severe the consequences will be.
The “when” is a continuous process. It’s not a single point in time. The need for sustainable practices has been growing for decades and will continue to grow as our population increases and our resources dwindle. The “when” is now, it was yesterday, and it will be tomorrow.
Thinking about 4650 helps us frame the long-term perspective. It forces us to consider the consequences of our current actions on future generations. It highlights the importance of developing and implementing sustainable technologies now to avoid a catastrophic future.

So, to answer the question directly: Sustainable technology is required now and will be even more critical in the distant future represented by 4650. It’s not about waiting for a specific date, but about addressing the urgent challenges we face today and ensuring a livable planet for future generations.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

This is a really interesting question that gets at the heart of why we talk about sustainability! It’s not just about some vague future, but about the very real places where we need sustainable technology now and where that need will likely be even more critical in the future (like the hypothetical 4650).

Here’s how we can think about “where” sustainable technology is required:

1. Everywhere on Earth:

Global Challenges: Issues like climate change, pollution, and resource depletion affect the entire planet. Sustainable technology is needed in every country and region to address these shared challenges.
Interconnected Systems: Our world is interconnected. What happens in one place can have ripple effects across the globe. Sustainable practices are needed everywhere to ensure the health of the planet as a whole.

2. Specific Locations with High Need:

Vulnerable Ecosystems: Areas like rainforests, coral reefs, and polar regions are particularly sensitive to environmental changes. Sustainable technology is crucial to protect these vital ecosystems.
Urban Centers: Cities are hubs of population and consumption, and they often face challenges like air pollution, waste management, and energy consumption. Sustainable solutions are needed to make cities more livable and environmentally friendly.
Developing Regions: Many developing countries face challenges related to poverty, lack of access to resources, and environmental degradation. Sustainable technology can help these regions develop in a way that is both economically viable and environmentally responsible.

3. In All Sectors of Society:

Energy: Sustainable energy technologies are needed to transition away from fossil fuels and towards renewable sources.
Agriculture: Sustainable agriculture practices are needed to feed a growing population while minimizing environmental impact.
Transportation: Sustainable transportation technologies are needed to reduce emissions and improve air quality.
Manufacturing: Sustainable manufacturing processes are needed to reduce waste and conserve resources.

4. In Our Daily Lives:

Homes: Sustainable technologies can help us reduce our energy consumption, conserve water, and manage waste in our homes.
Workplaces: Businesses can adopt sustainable practices to reduce their environmental footprint and create a more sustainable economy.
Communities: Sustainable communities can be designed to promote walkability, reduce reliance on cars, and create a sense of environmental stewardship.

Thinking about 4650 helps us understand that the “where” is not just about physical locations, but also about the future. Sustainable technology is needed to create a world where future generations can thrive. It’s about ensuring that the “where” of tomorrow is a healthy and habitable planet for all.

How is required Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

The question “How is sustainable technology of 4650 required?” is intriguing because it asks about the method of needing something in a distant future. It’s less about how we build the technology and more about how the need arises and how it will be implemented. Let’s break it down:

1. The “How” of the Need:

Resource Depletion: By 4650 (and long before), continued unsustainable practices will likely have depleted crucial resources. This scarcity will force the adoption of sustainable technologies for resource management, recycling, and alternative materials.
Environmental Degradation: Climate change, pollution, and ecosystem collapse will make many areas uninhabitable or require drastic technological interventions. The severity of these conditions will dictate the how of needing sustainable solutions (e.g., atmospheric carbon capture, advanced water purification).
Population Growth: A larger population (if that’s the trajectory) will necessitate sustainable agriculture, efficient infrastructure, and resource distribution. The scale of the population will shape the how of needing these technologies.
Interconnected Crises: These factors will likely compound each other, creating cascading crises. The interconnectedness of the problems will influence the how of needing sustainable solutions—requiring holistic and integrated approaches.

2. The “How” of Implementation:

Necessity: By 4650, sustainable technology won’t be a choice; it will be a necessity for survival. This fundamental need will drive its implementation.
Innovation: The challenges will spur innovation and the development of even more advanced sustainable technologies. The urgency of the need will likely accelerate this process.
Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges will require unprecedented levels of international cooperation. The interdependence of nations will necessitate collaborative efforts in research, development, and implementation.
Societal Shift: Sustainable practices will likely be deeply ingrained in societal values and norms. The cultural transformation will support and reinforce the adoption of sustainable technology.
Integration: Sustainable technology won’t be a separate sector; it will be integrated into every aspect of life – energy, food production, transportation, construction, communication, and even social systems. The pervasiveness of the need will drive this integration.

3. The “How” of Ensuring Sustainability:

Lifecycle Thinking: Technologies will need to be designed with their entire lifecycle in mind, from resource extraction to end-of-life management. The holistic approach will be essential.
Resilience: Sustainable systems will need to be resilient to shocks and disruptions, whether environmental or social. The adaptability of the technologies will be crucial.
Equity: Sustainable solutions must be accessible and equitable for all members of society. The inclusivity of the technology will be vital.

In short, the “how” of needing sustainable technology in 4650 will be driven by the accumulated consequences of current unsustainable practices. The “how” of its implementation will be a complex interplay of necessity, innovation, cooperation, and societal transformation. It will be less about the specific mechanisms of the technology itself and more about the drivers that make it absolutely essential for the survival and well-being of future generations.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

It’s impossible to create a real case study of sustainable technology in 4650. Case studies analyze existing situations. We can’t analyze a future we haven’t experienced. However, we can create a hypothetical case study, a thought experiment that explores what such a case study might look like, based on current trends and our understanding of sustainability. This serves as a valuable exercise in future-thinking.

Here’s an example of a hypothetical case study outline for sustainable technology in 4650:

Hypothetical Case Study: The Great Atmospheric Regeneration Project – 4650

1. Introduction:

Briefly describe the Earth in 4650: Potentially outlining the environmental challenges faced (e.g., remnants of past climate change, resource scarcity) and the overall societal context.
Introduce the “Great Atmospheric Regeneration Project” (GARP) as a large-scale, multi-generational initiative aimed at restoring atmospheric balance.
State the purpose of the case study: To analyze the technologies, strategies, and social factors that contributed to the success (or partial success/failure) of GARP.

2. Background:

Detail the state of the atmosphere in the centuries leading up to 4650. What were the key pollutants? How severe was the climate crisis?
Describe the initial attempts to address the atmospheric issues and why they were insufficient. This could highlight the evolution of sustainable technology over time.

3. The GARP Technology:

Carbon Capture and Conversion: Describe the advanced technologies used to capture atmospheric carbon dioxide and convert it into stable forms (e.g., fuels, building materials). This could involve nanotechnology, advanced materials science, and bio-integrated systems.
Geoengineering (if used): If geoengineering techniques were employed, detail the specific methods, their intended effects, and their potential side effects. Discuss the ethical considerations surrounding their use.
Ecosystem Restoration: Explain the strategies used to revitalize forests, oceans, and other ecosystems, emphasizing their role in carbon sequestration and atmospheric regulation. This might involve advanced ecological restoration techniques, genetic engineering of plants, and automated reforestation systems.
Monitoring and Control Systems: Describe the sophisticated systems used to monitor atmospheric conditions, predict changes, and adjust the GARP technologies in real-time. This could involve global sensor networks, AI-powered analysis, and adaptive control mechanisms.

4. Implementation and Challenges:

Discuss the logistical challenges of implementing GARP on a global scale. How were resources mobilized? How was international cooperation achieved?
Analyze the social and political factors that influenced the project’s success or failure. Did resistance arise from certain groups? How were ethical dilemmas addressed?
Examine the economic impact of GARP. How did it affect industries, employment, and global trade?

5. Outcomes and Lessons Learned:

Describe the state of the atmosphere in 4650. To what extent has GARP achieved its goals?
Analyze the long-term effects of GARP on the environment and society.
Identify the key lessons learned from the project, both technological and social. What could future generations learn from this experience?

6. Conclusion:

Summarize the key findings of the case study.
Offer perspectives on the future of sustainable technology and its role in addressing global challenges.

This hypothetical case study structure allows us to explore the complex interplay of technology, society, and the environment in a future context. It can be a valuable tool for thinking critically about the challenges we face today and the potential solutions we might need in the future. It’s important to remember that this is just one possible scenario, and the actual future may be very different.

COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

White paper on Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 4650: A Speculative Exploration

Abstract:

This white paper explores the hypothetical landscape of sustainable technology in the year 4650. Acknowledging the speculative nature of predicting centuries into the future, it examines potential technological advancements, societal shifts, and environmental pressures that might shape the development and implementation of sustainable solutions. This exploration aims to stimulate thought and discussion about the long-term implications of current trends and the importance of investing in sustainable practices today.

1. Introduction:

Humanity’s relationship with the planet has been marked by a constant tension between progress and preservation. While technological advancements have brought about unprecedented improvements in living standards, they have also contributed to environmental degradation and resource depletion. Sustainable technology seeks to reconcile this tension by developing solutions that meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. This paper looks at the potential state of sustainable technology in 4650, a distant future where the consequences of our current choices will have fully unfolded.

2. The Context of 4650:

Predicting the specifics of 4650 is an exercise in informed speculation. However, we can extrapolate from current trends and imagine potential scenarios. It’s likely that by 4650, the effects of climate change will have become profoundly evident. Resource scarcity, ecosystem collapse, and extreme weather events may be commonplace. The global population, if it continues to grow, will likely place immense pressure on existing systems. In this context, sustainable technology will not be a luxury but a necessity for survival.

3. Potential Technological Advancements:

Advanced Energy Systems: By 4650, reliance on fossil fuels will likely be a distant memory. Renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and geothermal, will be dominant. Advanced energy storage technologies, perhaps involving highly efficient batteries or even entirely new energy storage paradigms, will be crucial for ensuring grid stability and reliability. Potentially, space-based solar power could be a reality.
Closed-Loop Resource Management: The concept of a circular economy will be fully realized. Advanced recycling technologies will enable the near-complete recovery of materials from waste streams. Manufacturing processes will be designed to minimize waste and maximize resource utilization. “Urban mining” of discarded materials may be a standard practice.
Bio-Integrated Technologies: The lines between biology and technology may blur. Bio-integrated systems could be used for everything from energy production to environmental remediation. Genetically engineered plants might be used to sequester carbon dioxide at a massive scale or to produce biofuels.
Precision Agriculture: Feeding a potentially larger population sustainably will require highly efficient agriculture. Precision agriculture techniques, using sensors, AI, and robotics, will optimize crop yields while minimizing water and fertilizer use. Vertical farms and other innovative food production systems may become widespread.
Advanced Materials Science: Sustainable materials will be essential. New materials with unique properties, such as self-healing polymers or biodegradable composites, may be developed. Nanotechnology could play a significant role in creating materials with specific functionalities.
Global Monitoring and Control Systems: Managing a complex and interconnected world will require sophisticated monitoring systems. Global sensor networks, coupled with AI-powered analysis, could provide real-time data on environmental conditions, resource availability, and population movements, allowing for proactive responses to emerging challenges.

4. Societal and Ethical Considerations:

Global Cooperation: Addressing global challenges will require unprecedented levels of international cooperation. Global governance structures may evolve to facilitate collaboration on environmental issues and resource management.
Ethical Frameworks: Advanced technologies, particularly those involving bioengineering or geoengineering, will raise complex ethical questions. Robust ethical frameworks will be needed to guide their development and deployment.
Social Equity: Ensuring equitable access to resources and technologies will be crucial for social stability. Sustainable solutions must benefit all members of society, not just a privileged few.
Cultural Transformation: A shift in societal values and norms will be necessary to support sustainable practices. Environmental stewardship will need to become deeply ingrained in human culture.

5. Conclusion:

While the specifics of 4650 remain uncertain, it’s clear that sustainable technology will play a critical role in shaping the future. By investing in research and development today, we can increase the likelihood of developing the solutions needed to address the challenges of tomorrow. This white paper serves as a call to action, urging us to embrace sustainable practices and work towards a future where humanity and the planet can thrive together. The journey to 4650 begins now.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

You’re asking about the practical, real-world applications of sustainable technology in a hypothetical future! It’s a fascinating area to speculate on. Here are some potential industrial applications of sustainable technology in 4650, building on the technologies mentioned in the previous white paper:

1. Advanced Manufacturing and Resource Management:

Closed-Loop Production Systems: Factories will likely operate on closed-loop principles, where waste is minimized and resources are continuously recycled. Advanced material science and nanotechnology will enable the creation of durable, reusable products.
On-Demand Manufacturing: 3D printing and other additive manufacturing technologies will be highly advanced, allowing for on-demand production of goods, reducing waste from overproduction and streamlining supply chains.
Urban Mining and Resource Recovery: Specialized facilities will extract valuable materials from discarded products and waste streams, effectively turning waste into a resource.
AI-Powered Optimization: Artificial intelligence will be used to optimize manufacturing processes, minimizing energy consumption and maximizing efficiency.

2. Energy Production and Distribution:

Decentralized Energy Grids: Energy will likely be generated from a variety of renewable sources (solar, wind, geothermal, etc.) and distributed through smart, decentralized grids that minimize transmission losses.
Space-Based Solar Power: Large-scale solar energy collectors in space could beam clean energy to Earth, providing a continuous and abundant power source.
Advanced Energy Storage: Highly efficient energy storage technologies will be essential for balancing supply and demand, ensuring grid stability and reliability.
Fusion Power (Potential): If fusion power becomes a reality, it could provide a clean and virtually limitless source of energy.

3. Sustainable Agriculture and Food Production:

Vertical Farms and Controlled Environment Agriculture: Urban centers may have large-scale vertical farms that use hydroponics, aeroponics, and other advanced techniques to produce food efficiently with minimal land and water use.
Precision Agriculture: AI-powered systems will monitor crops and soil conditions in real-time, optimizing irrigation, fertilization, and pest control, reducing resource use and environmental impact.
Alternative Protein Production: Cultured meat and other alternative protein sources may become widespread, reducing the environmental footprint of traditional animal agriculture.
Personalized Nutrition: Advanced technologies could analyze an individual’s genetic makeup and nutritional needs to create personalized food plans and even produce customized food products.

4. Environmental Remediation and Restoration:

Atmospheric Carbon Capture and Conversion: Large-scale facilities will capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and convert it into useful products, helping to mitigate climate change.
Ocean Cleanup and Restoration: Advanced robotics and other technologies will be used to remove pollutants from the oceans and restore damaged ecosystems.
Ecosystem Regeneration: Techniques like bioengineering and advanced ecological restoration will be used to revitalize forests, wetlands, and other critical ecosystems.

5. Transportation and Infrastructure:

Hyperloop and Maglev Trains: High-speed transportation systems like hyperloop or maglev trains could connect cities and regions, reducing travel times and energy consumption.
Electric and Autonomous Vehicles: Electric vehicles will likely be dominant, and autonomous driving technology could further improve efficiency and safety.
Smart Infrastructure: Cities will be equipped with smart infrastructure systems that optimize traffic flow, manage energy and water resources, and improve overall efficiency.

6. Biotechnology and Healthcare:

Personalized Medicine: Advanced genetic testing and AI could enable personalized medicine, tailoring treatments to an individual’s specific needs.
Biomanufacturing: Biologically engineered systems could be used to produce pharmaceuticals, biofuels, and other valuable products sustainably.
Regenerative Medicine: Technologies like 3D bioprinting could be used to create replacement organs and tissues, revolutionizing healthcare.

These are just a few examples of the potential industrial applications of sustainable technology in 4650. The actual applications will depend on the specific challenges and opportunities that arise in the future. However, it’s clear that sustainable technology will play a crucial role in creating a more environmentally responsible and resource-efficient industrial sector.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4650 ?

You’re asking about the cutting edge of innovation in a distant future! It’s a fun thought experiment to consider what research and development (R&D) might be focused on in sustainable technology in 4650. Here are some potential areas, building on the previous points:

1. Fundamental Science and Materials:

Beyond Silicon: Exploring new materials to replace silicon in electronics, potentially with bio-integrated or entirely novel substances that are more sustainable and efficient.
Harnessing New Energy Sources: Investigating and potentially utilizing new energy sources beyond current renewables, perhaps including zero-point energy or other theoretical physics concepts.
Understanding Complex Systems: Developing a deeper understanding of complex systems like climate, ecosystems, and even social structures to better predict and manage their behavior.

2. Advanced Technologies and Applications:

Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) for Sustainability: Developing AGI systems specifically focused on solving sustainability challenges, capable of independent research, design, and implementation of solutions.
Nanotechnology and Molecular Manufacturing: Utilizing nanotechnology to create materials and devices at the atomic level, potentially enabling the construction of anything from carbon capture systems to self-healing infrastructure.
Bio-Integrated Systems and Synthetic Biology: Further blurring the lines between biology and technology, creating systems that can perform complex tasks like energy production, resource management, and even environmental remediation.
Space-Based Technologies for Sustainability: Expanding the use of space-based technologies for Earth observation, resource management, and potentially even off-world resource acquisition to reduce pressure on Earth’s resources.

3. Social and Ethical Dimensions:

Sustainable Governance Systems: Researching and developing new models of governance that can effectively address global challenges and ensure equitable access to resources and technologies.
Ethical Frameworks for Advanced Technologies: Creating robust ethical frameworks to guide the development and deployment of powerful technologies like AGI, bioengineering, and geoengineering.
Behavioral Science for Sustainability: Studying human behavior and developing strategies to promote sustainable practices and encourage a shift towards a more environmentally conscious society.

4. Long-Term Sustainability and Resilience:

Planetary Engineering: Investigating the possibility of large-scale interventions to manage Earth’s climate and ecosystems, while carefully considering the ethical and environmental implications.
Resilience to Existential Threats: Researching ways to protect humanity and the planet from potential existential threats, such as asteroid impacts, pandemics, or even self-inflicted catastrophes.
Interstellar Sustainability: If humanity expands beyond Earth, research into sustainable living and resource management in space and on other planets will become crucial.

5. Interdisciplinary Collaboration:

Convergence of Disciplines: R&D in sustainable technology will likely involve a convergence of multiple disciplines, including physics, biology, computer science, engineering, social sciences, and even the arts and humanities.
Global Research Networks: International collaboration will be essential for sharing knowledge, resources, and expertise to accelerate the development of sustainable solutions.

It’s important to remember that this is all speculation. The actual focus of R&D in sustainable technology in 4650 will depend on the challenges and opportunities that arise in the intervening centuries. However, it’s safe to say that research w

ill be driven by the need to ensure a sustainable and thriving future for humanity and the planet.

COURTESY : TURILYTIX

References

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

Sustainable technology of 4650