Sustainable technology of 4840

Leave a Comment / Blog / By
79 / 100
Powered by Rank Math SEO

Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

Corning’s product number 4840 refers to their 0.2-10 µL Microvolume Bulk Packed Pipet Tips. These are used in laboratories for precise liquid handling. Corning emphasizes the sustainability of these tips in a few ways:

  • EcoChoice Product: Corning designates these as an EcoChoice product, meaning they are produced, packaged, and/or distributed in an environmentally friendly manner, following FTC guidelines.
  • Renewable Energy: At least one facility that manufactures these tips is powered by 100% renewable energy, thanks to the purchase of energy attribute certificates.
  • Reduced Resin: The bulk packaging of these tips uses significantly less resin (87% less) compared to pre-racked alternatives, reducing plastic waste.

While these points highlight the sustainable aspects of the product itself, it’s important to remember that sustainability in a lab setting goes beyond individual products. It also involves:

  • Responsible Disposal: Ensuring proper disposal of the tips and their packaging.
  • Minimizing Usage: Using only the necessary amount of tips to reduce overall consumption.
  • Exploring Alternatives: Considering reusable or more sustainable alternatives when possible.

If you are interested in further exploring sustainable lab practices, you may want to research resources on green labs and sustainable laboratory equipment.

What is Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional.

Corning’s product number 4840 refers to their 0.2-10 µL Microvolume Bulk Packed Pipet Tips. These are used in laboratories for precise liquid handling. Corning emphasizes the sustainability of these tips in a few ways:

  • EcoChoice Product: Corning designates these as an EcoChoice product, meaning they are produced, packaged, and/or distributed in an environmentally friendly manner, following FTC guidelines.
  • Renewable Energy: At least one facility that manufactures these tips is powered by 100% renewable energy, thanks to the purchase of energy attribute certificates.
  • Reduced Resin: The bulk packaging of these tips uses significantly less resin (87% less) compared to pre-racked alternatives, reducing plastic waste.

While these points highlight the sustainable aspects of the product itself, it’s important to remember that sustainability in a lab setting goes beyond individual products. It also involves:

  • Responsible Disposal: Ensuring proper disposal of the tips and their packaging.
  • Minimizing Usage: Using only the necessary amount of tips to reduce overall consumption.
  • Exploring Alternatives: Considering reusable or more sustainable alternatives when possible.

If you are interested in further exploring sustainable lab practices, you may want to research resources on green labs and sustainable laboratory equipment.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional.

Corning’s product number 4840 refers to their 0.2-10 µL Microvolume Bulk Packed Pipet Tips. These are used in laboratories for precise liquid handling. Corning emphasizes the sustainability of these tips in a few ways:

  • EcoChoice Product: Corning designates these as an EcoChoice product, meaning they are produced, packaged, and/or distributed in an environmentally friendly manner, following FTC guidelines.
  • Renewable Energy: At least one facility that manufactures these tips is powered by 100% renewable energy, thanks to the purchase of energy attribute certificates.
  • Reduced Resin: The bulk packaging of these tips uses significantly less resin (87% less) compared to pre-racked alternatives, reducing plastic waste.

While these points highlight the sustainable aspects of the product itself, it’s important to remember that sustainability in a lab setting goes beyond individual products. It also involves:

  • Responsible Disposal: Ensuring proper disposal of the tips and their packaging.
  • Minimizing Usage: Using only the necessary amount of tips to reduce overall consumption.
  • Exploring Alternatives: Considering reusable or more sustainable alternatives when possible.

If you are interested in further exploring sustainable lab practices, you may want to research resources on green labs and sustainable laboratory equipment.

When is required Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

This is for informational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional.

Corning’s product number 4840 refers to their 0.2-10 µL Microvolume Bulk Packed Pipet Tips. These are used in laboratories for precise liquid handling. Corning emphasizes the sustainability of these tips in a few ways:

  • EcoChoice Product: Corning designates these as an EcoChoice product, meaning they are produced, packaged, and/or distributed in an environmentally friendly manner, following FTC guidelines.
  • Renewable Energy: At least one facility that manufactures these tips is powered by 100% renewable energy, thanks to the purchase of energy attribute certificates.
  • Reduced Resin: The bulk packaging of these tips uses significantly less resin (87% less) compared to pre-racked alternatives, reducing plastic waste.

While these points highlight the sustainable aspects of the product itself, it’s important to remember that sustainability in a lab setting goes beyond individual products. It also involves:

  • Responsible Disposal: Ensuring proper disposal of the tips and their packaging.
  • Minimizing Usage: Using only the necessary amount of tips to reduce overall consumption.
  • Exploring Alternatives: Considering reusable or more sustainable alternatives when possible.

If you are interested in further exploring sustainable lab practices, you may want to research resources on green labs and sustainable laboratory equipment.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

Where is required Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

Corning’s product number 4840, the 0.2-10 µL Microvolume Bulk Packed Pipet Tips, are used in laboratory settings where precise liquid handling is required. This includes a wide range of labs such as:

  • Research labs: In universities, hospitals, and private research institutions.
  • Clinical labs: For diagnostic testing and analysis.
  • Pharmaceutical labs: In drug discovery and development.
  • Biotechnology labs: Working with biological materials and processes.
  • Industrial labs: In quality control and testing for various industries.

Essentially, any lab that performs experiments or analyses involving small volumes of liquids and requires accurate measurements could potentially use these pipet tips. The “sustainable technology” aspect (reduced resin, renewable energy use in manufacturing) is relevant wherever these tips are used, as it contributes to minimizing the environmental impact of laboratory work.

How is required Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

The “sustainable technology” aspect of Corning’s 4840 pipet tips (and similar products) isn’t something that’s required in a legal or mandatory sense in most places. Instead, it’s driven by a combination of factors:

  • Corporate Social Responsibility: Companies like Corning are increasingly aware of their environmental impact and are taking steps to reduce it. Offering more sustainable products is part of this.
  • Customer Demand: Labs and research institutions are also becoming more environmentally conscious. They are looking for ways to reduce their own footprint, and choosing sustainable lab supplies is one way to do that. This creates a market demand for products like the 4840 tips.
  • Cost Savings: In some cases, sustainable practices can also lead to cost savings. For example, reduced packaging can mean lower shipping costs and less waste disposal fees. While the initial cost of a product might be slightly higher, the long-term benefits might outweigh this.
  • Regulations (Indirectly): While there might not be specific regulations requiring these particular sustainable features, there are often broader environmental regulations that encourage or incentivize sustainable practices in general. This can indirectly drive the adoption of more sustainable lab supplies.

So, the “how” is a mix of companies choosing to offer these features, customers choosing to buy them, and a general trend towards greater environmental awareness and responsibility. It’s not usually a legal requirement, but rather a market-driven and ethically-driven preference.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

Unfortunately, there isn’t a readily available, published case study specifically focusing on Corning’s 4840 pipet tips and their sustainability impact. However, we can construct a hypothetical case study based on the information available and general trends in sustainable lab practices.

Hypothetical Case Study: The Impact of Sustainable Pipet Tips in a Research Laboratory

Introduction:

“XYZ Research Institute,” a leading biomedical research facility, was committed to reducing its environmental footprint. As a high-volume user of disposable pipet tips, the institute sought ways to minimize plastic waste and promote sustainable practices in its laboratories. This case study examines the impact of switching to Corning’s 4840 microvolume pipet tips, with their focus on reduced resin and renewable energy in manufacturing, on the institute’s waste reduction efforts and overall sustainability goals.

Methods:

  • Baseline Assessment: The institute conducted an initial audit of its pipet tip consumption, waste generation, and associated costs.
  • Implementation: The institute transitioned to Corning 4840 pipet tips for all applicable research activities.
  • Data Collection: Over a one-year period, the institute tracked:
    • Pipet tip usage and waste generation.
    • Cost savings from reduced resin and packaging.
    • Feedback from researchers on tip performance and usability.
  • Analysis: The collected data was analyzed to assess the impact of the switch to sustainable pipet tips on waste reduction, cost savings, and researcher satisfaction.

Results:

  • Waste Reduction: The institute observed a significant reduction in plastic waste associated with pipet tips, primarily due to the bulk packaging of the 4840 tips, which uses 87% less resin than pre-racked alternatives.
  • Cost Savings: The reduced resin and packaging translated into cost savings for the institute, both in terms of purchasing costs and waste disposal fees.
  • Researcher Satisfaction: Researchers reported high satisfaction with the performance and usability of the 4840 tips, noting no significant difference compared to traditional pipet tips.

Discussion:

The results of this hypothetical case study suggest that switching to sustainable pipet tips like Corning’s 4840 can have a positive impact on a research laboratory’s waste reduction efforts and overall sustainability goals. The reduced resin and packaging contribute to minimizing plastic waste and associated costs, while maintaining researcher satisfaction with tip performance.

Conclusion:

This case study demonstrates the potential benefits of adopting sustainable lab supplies, such as Corning’s 4840 pipet tips, in research settings. By prioritizing environmentally friendly products and practices, laboratories can significantly reduce their environmental footprint and contribute to a more sustainable future for scientific research.

Limitations:

This is a hypothetical case study based on available information and general trends. Actual results may vary depending on the specific laboratory setting and its practices.

Recommendations:

  • Laboratories should consider conducting their own assessments of pipet tip usage and waste generation to identify opportunities for improvement.
  • Institutions should explore and prioritize the use of sustainable lab supplies whenever possible.
  • Collaboration among researchers, suppliers, and institutions is crucial to promote and advance sustainable lab practices.

While this is a hypothetical case study, it highlights the potential benefits of sustainable lab supplies like Corning’s 4840 pipet tips. As more labs prioritize sustainability, we may see more real-world case studies emerge, showcasing the positive impact of these initiatives.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

White paper on Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

While a specific white paper dedicated solely to the sustainability aspects of Corning’s 4840 pipet tips might not exist, here’s how we can approach creating one, along with the kind of information it would contain:

Title: Sustainable Liquid Handling: A Case Study of Corning 4840 Microvolume Pipet Tips

Abstract:

This white paper examines the sustainability features of Corning’s 4840 microvolume pipet tips, widely used in research and laboratory settings. It explores the environmental benefits associated with reduced resin consumption in packaging, the use of renewable energy in manufacturing, and the overall contribution to minimizing plastic waste in laboratories. The paper also discusses the broader context of sustainable lab practices and encourages the adoption of environmentally responsible choices in scientific research.

Introduction:

  • Briefly introduce the importance of sustainable practices in laboratory settings.
  • Highlight the increasing concern about plastic waste and the environmental impact of disposable lab supplies.
  • Introduce Corning’s 4840 pipet tips as a case study of a more sustainable approach to liquid handling.

Sustainability Features of Corning 4840 Pipet Tips:

  • Reduced Resin Packaging:
    • Explain the significant reduction in resin used for the bulk packaging of 4840 tips compared to traditional rack packaging.
    • Quantify the environmental benefits in terms of reduced plastic waste, lower carbon footprint, and decreased landfill burden.
  • Renewable Energy in Manufacturing:
    • Discuss Corning’s commitment to using renewable energy in their manufacturing facilities.
    • Explain how this reduces the environmental impact associated with the production of the pipet tips.
  • EcoChoice Designation:
    • Describe Corning’s EcoChoice program and how it aligns with FTC guidelines for environmentally friendly products.
    • Explain the criteria used to designate a product as EcoChoice and what it means for consumers.

Broader Context of Sustainable Lab Practices:

  • Waste Reduction Strategies:
    • Discuss the importance of minimizing pipet tip usage and exploring alternatives like reusable tips when appropriate.
    • Provide tips for responsible disposal of pipet tips and packaging.
  • Green Lab Initiatives:
    • Introduce the concept of “green labs” and their focus on minimizing environmental impact through various practices.
    • Highlight resources and organizations that promote sustainable lab practices.
  • Life Cycle Assessment:
    • Briefly discuss the concept of life cycle assessment and how it can be used to evaluate the environmental impact of lab supplies from production to disposal.

Case Studies and Examples:

  • Hypothetical Case Study:
    • Include a hypothetical case study (similar to the one in the previous response) demonstrating the potential impact of switching to 4840 tips in a research lab.
  • Real-World Examples:
    • If available, include real-world examples of labs that have successfully implemented sustainable pipetting practices.

Conclusion:

  • Reiterate the importance of sustainable lab practices and the role of products like Corning 4840 pipet tips in minimizing environmental impact.
  • Encourage researchers and lab professionals to actively seek out and prioritize sustainable lab supplies.

Recommendations:

  • Provide recommendations for labs looking to improve their sustainability efforts, including:
    • Conducting waste audits
    • Exploring sustainable product options
    • Implementing green lab initiatives
    • Educating lab personnel on sustainable practices

References:

  • Include a list of relevant sources, such as Corning’s product information, articles on sustainable lab practices, and reports on environmental impact.

This white paper would serve as a valuable resource for laboratories seeking to make more sustainable choices in their daily operations. It would provide information on the specific sustainability features of Corning 4840 pipet tips while also placing them in the broader context of environmentally responsible lab practices.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

While Corning 4840 pipet tips are primarily designed for laboratory use, the underlying sustainable technologies they employ have broader industrial applications. Here are some examples:

1. Reduced Resin Packaging:

  • Consumer Goods: The concept of minimizing packaging material applies to a wide range of industries, from food and beverages to cosmetics and household products. Companies are increasingly exploring innovative packaging designs that use less plastic, reduce waste, and are still functional and appealing to consumers.
  • Electronics: In the electronics industry, where products often come with excessive packaging, there’s a growing push to use more sustainable materials and reduce overall packaging volume. This can involve using recycled materials, plant-based plastics, or innovative designs that minimize the need for packaging altogether.
  • Industrial Materials: Even in industrial settings where packaging might not be as visually important, reducing material usage can lead to significant cost savings and environmental benefits. This can involve using bulk packaging, concentrated formulas, or reusable containers.

2. Renewable Energy in Manufacturing:

  • Various Industries: The use of renewable energy to power manufacturing facilities is a trend across various industries, not just lab supplies. Companies are increasingly investing in solar, wind, and other renewable energy sources to reduce their carbon footprint and reliance on fossil fuels.
  • Data Centers: Data centers, which consume vast amounts of energy, are also exploring renewable energy options to power their operations more sustainably.
  • Transportation: The transportation sector is shifting towards electric vehicles and alternative fuels, which rely on renewable energy sources for their power.

3. General Sustainability Principles:

  • Circular Economy: The principles of reducing waste, reusing materials, and recycling are applicable to all industries. Companies are exploring ways to design products for disassembly and reuse, implement closed-loop recycling systems, and minimize waste generation throughout their operations.
  • Green Chemistry: The principles of green chemistry, which focus on designing chemical processes that are less hazardous and more environmentally friendly, can be applied to various industries that use chemicals in their manufacturing processes.
  • Sustainable Supply Chains: Companies are increasingly looking at the environmental and social impact of their entire supply chains, from sourcing raw materials to manufacturing and distribution. This involves working with suppliers who adhere to sustainable practices and minimizing transportation distances.

Specific Examples Related to Pipette Tips:

  • Alternative Materials: Research into biodegradable or compostable alternatives to traditional plastic pipette tips could have applications in other single-use plastic products used in various industries.
  • Reusable Pipette Systems: The development of more robust and efficient reusable pipette systems could reduce the need for disposable tips altogether, with potential applications in other liquid handling processes in industries like pharmaceuticals, food and beverage, and chemical manufacturing.

In conclusion, while Corning 4840 pipet tips are designed for lab use, the sustainable technologies they represent have broader industrial applications. By focusing on reducing material usage, utilizing renewable energy, and adopting circular economy principles, various industries can minimize their environmental impact and contribute to a more sustainable future.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4840 ?

It’s great you’re thinking about the future of sustainable lab supplies! While Corning’s 4840 tips represent a step in the right direction, there’s always room for improvement. Here are some areas where research and development could further enhance the sustainability of these types of products:

1. Alternative Materials:

  • Biodegradable/Compostable Plastics: Research into bio-based plastics that can fully biodegrade or compost after use. This would significantly reduce the long-term environmental impact of disposable tips. Challenges include ensuring these materials are compatible with lab processes, maintaining sterility, and achieving cost-effectiveness.
  • Reusable Materials: Developing durable, chemically resistant materials that can be used to create reusable pipette tips. This would require robust cleaning and sterilization methods to be practical in a lab setting.

2. Design for Disassembly and Recycling:

  • Modular Tips: Designing tips with easily detachable components made from different materials, facilitating easier recycling or reuse of specific parts.
  • Standardized Components: Creating industry-wide standards for tip components to enable a more efficient recycling system, where different parts can be collected and processed separately.

3. Reducing Microplastics:

  • Tip Material Formulation: Researching tip materials that minimize the shedding of microplastics during use and disposal. This is crucial as microplastics are a growing environmental concern.
  • Filtration Systems: Developing lab-scale filtration systems that can effectively capture microplastics from wastewater generated during lab activities.

4. Optimizing Manufacturing Processes:

  • Closed-Loop Systems: Implementing closed-loop manufacturing processes that minimize waste generation and recycle byproducts within the production cycle.
  • Energy Efficiency: Continuously improving the energy efficiency of the manufacturing process, further reducing the environmental footprint.

5. Life Cycle Assessment and Transparency:

  • Comprehensive LCA: Conducting thorough life cycle assessments to identify all environmental impacts associated with the production, use, and disposal of pipette tips.
  • Transparent Supply Chains: Ensuring transparency in the supply chain to track the origin of materials and the environmental practices of suppliers.

6. User Behavior and Education:

  • Promoting Responsible Use: Researching ways to encourage responsible usage of pipette tips in labs, such as minimizing unnecessary use and promoting proper disposal practices.
  • Educational Programs: Developing educational programs and resources to raise awareness about sustainable lab practices and the importance of choosing environmentally friendly lab supplies.

Collaboration is Key:

Advancements in these areas will likely require collaboration between material scientists, engineers, lab equipment manufacturers, researchers, and policymakers. Funding for research and development in sustainable lab supplies is also crucial.

By focusing on these areas, we can move towards a future where laboratory practices are more environmentally sustainable, minimizing the impact of essential tools like pipette tips on our planet.

COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

References

[edit]

  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.

Recommended HashTags

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »