
Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
Unfortunately, pinpointing specific sustainable technologies from 4900 BC is challenging due to limited historical records. However, we can explore the general practices and innovations of that era that demonstrate an understanding of sustainability:
- Water Management:
- Jawa Dam: Constructed in modern-day Jordan during the 4th millennium BC, this dam is one of the oldest known examples of water retention technology. It was used to irrigate dry land, enabling farming in otherwise unsuitable areas. This demonstrates an early understanding of water conservation and its importance for sustainable agriculture.
- Qanats: Developed in Persia (modern-day Iran), qanats are underground water channels that extract groundwater while minimizing evaporation. This ingenious system allowed for efficient irrigation in arid regions, showcasing a deep understanding of water resource management.
- Agriculture:
- Crop Rotation: While evidence might not be conclusive for 4900 BC, the concept of crop rotation likely existed in some form. This practice involves alternating different crops in a field to maintain soil fertility and reduce pest issues, promoting long-term agricultural sustainability.
- Terrace Farming: In hilly regions, terrace farming was likely practiced to prevent soil erosion and maximize arable land. This technique involves creating step-like platforms on slopes, allowing for cultivation in otherwise challenging terrains.
- Building Materials and Techniques:
- Sun-dried Bricks: Utilizing readily available clay and straw, sun-dried bricks were a common building material. This approach minimized the need for energy-intensive firing processes, reducing environmental impact.
- Passive Solar Design: Homes in some ancient cities were strategically oriented to maximize winter sun exposure while minimizing summer heat gain. This passive solar design principle, which is still relevant today, demonstrates an understanding of utilizing natural elements for climate control.
- Resource Management:
- Local Materials: Communities relied heavily on locally available resources for construction, tools, and everyday items. This minimized transportation needs and promoted a circular economy approach.
- Waste Management: While formal waste management systems may not have existed, communities likely practiced basic forms of waste disposal and resource reuse.
- Nature-Centric Mindset:
- Reverence for Nature: Ancient societies often held a deep reverence for nature, recognizing its importance for their survival. This mindset likely translated into practices that aimed to minimize environmental impact and maintain a balance with the natural world.
It’s important to note that our understanding of sustainable technologies in 4900 BC is limited by available evidence. However, the examples above suggest that early civilizations possessed a keen awareness of their environment and developed innovative solutions to ensure their long-term survival and well-being.
As we continue to explore and learn more about our past, we may uncover further evidence of sustainable practices and technologies from this era.
What is Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
While the concept of “technology” as we understand it today didn’t exist in 4900 BC, people of that era possessed knowledge and skills that were remarkably sustainable. Here are some examples of what could be considered “sustainable technology” of that time:
1. Resource Management & Agriculture:
- Water Management: Ancient civilizations were adept at managing scarce water resources. The Jawa Dam in modern-day Jordan, built in the 4th millennium BC, is one of the oldest known examples of water retention technology. It was used to irrigate dry land, enabling farming in otherwise unsuitable areas. This demonstrates an early understanding of water conservation and its importance for sustainable agriculture.
- Crop Rotation: While evidence might not be conclusive for 4900 BC, the concept of crop rotation likely existed in some form. This practice involves alternating different crops in a field to maintain soil fertility and reduce pest issues, promoting long-term agricultural sustainability.
- Terrace Farming: In hilly regions, terrace farming was likely practiced to prevent soil erosion and maximize arable land. This technique involves creating step-like platforms on slopes, allowing for cultivation in otherwise challenging terrains.
2. Building Materials and Techniques:
- Sun-dried Bricks: Utilizing readily available clay and straw, sun-dried bricks were a common building material. This approach minimized the need for energy-intensive firing processes, reducing environmental impact.
- Passive Solar Design: Homes in some ancient cities were strategically oriented to maximize winter sun exposure while minimizing summer heat gain. This passive solar design principle, which is still relevant today, demonstrates an understanding of utilizing natural elements for climate control.
3. Other Sustainable Practices:
- Local Materials: Communities relied heavily on locally available resources for construction, tools, and everyday items. This minimized transportation needs and promoted a circular economy approach.
- Waste Management: While formal waste management systems may not have existed, communities likely practiced basic forms of waste disposal and resource reuse.
- Nature-Centric Mindset: Ancient societies often held a deep reverence for nature, recognizing its importance for their survival. This mindset likely translated into practices that aimed to minimize environmental impact and maintain a balance with the natural world.
It’s important to note that our understanding of sustainable technologies in 4900 BC is limited by available evidence. However, the examples above suggest that early civilizations possessed a keen awareness of their environment and developed innovative solutions to ensure their long-term survival and well-being.
As we continue to explore and learn more about our past, we may uncover further evidence of sustainable practices and technologies from this era.
Who is required Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
In 4900 BC, the need for sustainable technology was universal. It wasn’t a matter of specific groups requiring it, but rather a necessity for the survival and prosperity of all communities. Here’s why:
- Limited Resources: Early civilizations had access to a limited range of resources, and these were often localized. Overexploitation could lead to depletion and hardship. Sustainable practices ensured the long-term availability of essential resources like water, fertile land, and building materials.
- Environmental Challenges: Communities faced various environmental challenges, including droughts, floods, soil erosion, and climate variations. Sustainable technologies helped them adapt to these challenges and mitigate their impact.
- Interconnectedness: People were deeply connected to their environment. Their livelihoods depended directly on the health and productivity of the natural world. Sustainable practices ensured a harmonious relationship with nature, promoting both human well-being and ecological balance.
- Long-Term Survival: The primary goal of any society is to ensure its long-term survival. Sustainable practices were essential for this, allowing communities to thrive for generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Therefore, sustainable technology in 4900 BC was not required by any specific group, but rather by all of humanity. It was a fundamental aspect of life, essential for survival, prosperity, and the harmonious coexistence of humans and nature.
When is required Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
The need for sustainable technology in 4900 BC was constant and ongoing. It wasn’t a matter of specific times, but rather an integral part of life. Here’s why:
- Daily Survival: The challenges of obtaining food, water, shelter, and other necessities were immediate and pressing. Sustainable practices were essential for meeting these daily needs without depleting resources or harming the environment.
- Seasonal Cycles: Communities relied on seasonal cycles for agriculture, hunting, and gathering. Understanding and adapting to these cycles was crucial for ensuring a stable food supply. Sustainable practices, such as crop rotation and water management, helped to maintain the productivity of the land throughout the year.
- Long-Term Planning: While daily survival was important, communities also needed to plan for the future. Sustainable practices ensured that resources would be available for future generations, allowing societies to thrive over time.
- Unpredictable Events: Natural disasters, such as droughts, floods, and storms, could disrupt daily life and threaten long-term survival. Sustainable technologies, such as water storage and resilient building techniques, helped communities to prepare for and recover from these events.
Therefore, the need for sustainable technology in 4900 BC was not limited to specific times, but rather a continuous requirement for survival, prosperity, and resilience in the face of daily challenges, seasonal cycles, long-term planning, and unpredictable events.
courtesy : Tech Evaluate
Where is required Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
In 4900 BC, the need for sustainable technology was relevant everywhere humans lived and interacted with their environment. It wasn’t confined to specific regions, but rather a universal necessity. Here’s why:
- Diverse Environments: Early civilizations inhabited a wide range of environments, from fertile river valleys to arid deserts, coastal regions, and mountainous terrains. Each environment presented unique challenges and opportunities, requiring tailored sustainable technologies.
- Global Interconnectedness: While communities were often localized, they were also interconnected through trade, migration, and cultural exchange. Sustainable practices in one region could have ripple effects on others, highlighting the global importance of sustainability even in ancient times.
- Resource Distribution: Resources like water, fertile land, and minerals were not evenly distributed across the globe. Sustainable technologies helped communities to manage these resources effectively, ensuring their availability for present and future generations, regardless of location.
- Universal Needs: The basic needs of humanity – food, water, shelter, and clothing – were universal. Sustainable technologies played a crucial role in meeting these needs in a way that respected the environment and ensured long-term survival, no matter where people lived.
Therefore, the need for sustainable technology in 4900 BC was not limited to specific locations, but rather a global imperative. It was essential for human survival, prosperity, and the harmonious coexistence of humans and nature in all inhabited regions of the world.
How is required Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
The “how” of requiring sustainable technology in 4900 BC is best understood as a combination of inherent needs and developing practices. It wasn’t a formal, codified requirement, but rather an implicit understanding woven into the fabric of daily life. Here’s how it worked:
- Necessity: The most fundamental driver was simple necessity. Without sustainable practices, communities wouldn’t survive. Depleting resources, failing crops, or environmental damage would have immediate and severe consequences. This direct link between action and consequence made sustainability a non-negotiable aspect of life.
- Traditional Knowledge: Sustainable practices were passed down through generations as traditional knowledge. This wasn’t written down, but rather learned through observation, experience, and oral tradition. Skills in farming, water management, building, and resource use were refined over time and became ingrained in the culture.
- Community Cooperation: Many sustainable practices required community cooperation. Building and maintaining irrigation systems, managing shared resources, and responding to environmental challenges often demanded collective effort. Social structures likely evolved to facilitate this cooperation, reinforcing the importance of sustainable practices.
- Trial and Error: Early civilizations didn’t have scientific methods as we understand them today. Sustainable technologies likely developed through a process of trial and error. Communities experimented with different techniques, observed the results, and refined their approaches over time. Those who successfully adopted sustainable practices were more likely to thrive, leading to the spread of those practices.
- Respect for Nature: Many ancient cultures held a deep respect for nature, recognizing its power and their dependence on it. This reverence likely played a role in shaping sustainable practices. People understood that they were part of the natural world and that their actions had consequences for the environment.
In short, the “how” of requiring sustainable technology in 4900 BC was a complex interplay of environmental necessity, traditional knowledge, community cooperation, trial and error, and a nature-centric worldview. It wasn’t a formal requirement, but rather a fundamental aspect of life, deeply embedded in the culture and practices of early civilizations.
Case study is Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
It’s tricky to do a full “case study” on sustainable technology from 4900 BC due to the limitations of historical records. However, we can examine a specific example and analyze it as a case study to understand the principles at play:
Case Study: The Jawa Dam (Jordan)
- Context: Around 4900 BC, communities in the arid region of modern-day Jordan faced challenges in accessing reliable water sources for agriculture and survival.
- Solution: The Jawa Dam was constructed, one of the oldest known dams in the world. It was a gravity dam made of earth and stone, designed to capture and store seasonal floodwaters.
- Sustainable Aspects:
- Water Conservation: The dam enabled the storage and controlled release of water, allowing for irrigation of land that would otherwise be too dry for farming. This maximized the use of a scarce resource.
- Agricultural Productivity: By providing a reliable water supply, the dam supported agriculture, leading to increased food production and potentially allowing for settlement in areas previously unsuitable for habitation.
- Community Effort: The construction of such a large dam likely required significant community effort and organization, suggesting a social structure that supported collective action for the common good.
- Long-Term Impact: The Jawa Dam likely had a long-term impact on the region, supporting agricultural development and potentially influencing settlement patterns for centuries.
Analysis:
- Necessity: The dam was a direct response to the need for water in an arid environment. It highlights how necessity drives innovation in sustainable technologies.
- Resourcefulness: The use of readily available materials like earth and stone demonstrates resourcefulness and adaptation to the local environment.
- Ingenuity: The design and construction of the dam, without the benefit of modern engineering tools, showcases the ingenuity of early civilizations in understanding and manipulating natural forces.
- Sustainability: The Jawa Dam, by enabling water conservation and supporting agriculture, exemplifies the core principles of sustainable technology: meeting present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Limitations:
- Limited Evidence: Our understanding of the Jawa Dam and its impact is limited by the available archaeological evidence. We can only make inferences about its exact function, social context, and long-term effects.
- Complexity: This case study focuses on a single technology. In reality, sustainable technology in 4900 BC would have involved a complex interplay of various practices and innovations across different aspects of life.
Conclusion:
The Jawa Dam serves as a compelling case study of sustainable technology in 4900 BC. It illustrates how early civilizations responded to environmental challenges with ingenuity and resourcefulness, developing solutions that supported their survival and well-being while respecting the limitations of their environment. By analyzing such examples, we can gain valuable insights into the principles and practices of sustainable technology in ancient times.
courtesy : Bernard Marr
White paper on Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
White Paper: Sustainable Technology in 4900 BC – A Glimpse into the Past
Abstract:
This white paper explores the concept of “sustainable technology” in the context of 4900 BC. While the term “technology” might evoke images of modern machinery, this paper argues that early civilizations possessed a deep understanding of sustainability and implemented practices that allowed them to thrive within their environments. By examining archaeological evidence and anthropological insights, we can glean a picture of the sustainable technologies that shaped life in 4900 BC.
Introduction:
The year 4900 BC falls within the Neolithic period, a time of significant transition for human societies. Agriculture was becoming increasingly important, leading to the development of settled communities and the beginnings of more complex social structures. Crucially, these early societies were deeply intertwined with their environments, making sustainable practices essential for survival. This paper examines several key areas where evidence suggests the presence of sustainable “technologies” – not necessarily machines, but rather systems of knowledge and practice.
Key Areas of Sustainable Technology in 4900 BC:
- Water Management:
- Jawa Dam: The Jawa Dam in modern-day Jordan, dating back to this period, is a prime example of early water management. This gravity dam, constructed from earth and stone, allowed communities to capture and store seasonal floodwaters, providing a crucial resource for irrigation in an arid environment. This exemplifies the principle of water conservation and maximizing the use of scarce resources.
- Qanats (though likely developed slightly later): While their widespread use may have been slightly later, the concept of qanats – underground water channels – likely began to develop around this time. These ingenious systems minimized evaporation and allowed for efficient irrigation in dry regions, demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of hydrogeology.
- Agriculture:
- Crop Diversification/Rotation: While direct evidence is difficult to find for 4900 BC, the principles of crop diversification and eventually crop rotation were likely being developed. These practices help maintain soil fertility, reduce pest problems, and increase long-term agricultural productivity.
- Terrace Farming: In hilly regions, terrace farming was likely practiced to prevent soil erosion and create arable land. This labor-intensive technique demonstrates a commitment to maximizing land use and preserving valuable topsoil.
- Building Materials and Techniques:
- Sun-dried Bricks: The use of sun-dried bricks, made from readily available clay and straw, was widespread. These bricks required minimal energy to produce, unlike fired bricks, and were well-suited to the climates where they were used.
- Passive Solar Design: While evidence is often subtle, the orientation of dwellings to maximize solar gain in winter and minimize it in summer likely existed. This demonstrates an understanding of passive heating and cooling principles, reducing the need for other energy sources.
- Resource Management and Community Practices:
- Local Sourcing: Communities relied heavily on locally available resources for building, tools, and other necessities. This minimized transportation costs and the environmental impact associated with moving materials over long distances.
- Resource Reuse: While formal waste management systems didn’t exist, the principles of reuse and recycling were likely embedded in daily life. Broken tools could be repurposed, and organic waste could be used as fertilizer.
- Community Cooperation: Many of the sustainable practices outlined above, such as building dams and managing irrigation systems, required community cooperation and collective action. This suggests that social structures were developing to support and enforce sustainable practices.
Challenges and Limitations:
Our understanding of sustainable technology in 4900 BC is limited by the available evidence. Archaeological findings can provide insights into material culture and practices, but they cannot fully reveal the thought processes and knowledge systems of these early societies. Further research, including archaeological excavations, anthropological studies, and analysis of ancient DNA, may shed more light on this topic.
Conclusion:
While the “technology” of 4900 BC may look different from what we envision today, the principles of sustainability were clearly at play. Early civilizations developed ingenious solutions to the challenges of their environments, demonstrating a deep understanding of resource management, ecological balance, and the importance of long-term thinking. Studying these ancient practices can provide valuable lessons for contemporary efforts to create a more sustainable future.
Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
It’s important to understand that the concept of “industrial application” as we know it today didn’t exist in 4900 BC. The scale of production, the organization of labor, and the nature of “industry” were vastly different. However, we can explore how the principles of sustainable technology from that era relate to modern industrial applications:
- Water Management:
- Ancient Practice: The Jawa Dam and early qanats demonstrate sophisticated water harvesting and distribution techniques.
- Modern Application: These principles are reflected in modern water management systems, including:
- Reservoir construction and management: Optimizing water storage and release for irrigation, hydropower, and urban water supply.
- Drip irrigation: Minimizing water waste in agriculture, mimicking the efficiency of qanats.
- Water recycling and treatment: Treating wastewater for reuse in industrial processes, reducing reliance on freshwater sources.
- Agriculture:
- Ancient Practice: Crop rotation and terrace farming promoted soil health and prevented erosion.
- Modern Application: These principles are relevant to:
- Sustainable agriculture: Practices like no-till farming, cover cropping, and integrated pest management aim to minimize environmental impact and maintain soil fertility.
- Precision agriculture: Using technology to optimize resource use (water, fertilizer) based on real-time data, maximizing yields while minimizing waste.
- Building Materials and Techniques:
- Ancient Practice: Sun-dried bricks and passive solar design minimized energy use in construction.
- Modern Application: These principles are central to:
- Green building: Designing and constructing buildings that are energy-efficient, resource-conserving, and environmentally responsible.
- Sustainable materials: Using recycled and renewable materials, reducing the embodied energy of construction.
- Passive heating and cooling: Designing buildings to take advantage of natural sunlight and ventilation, reducing reliance on mechanical systems.
- Resource Management:
- Ancient Practice: Local sourcing and resource reuse minimized waste and transportation impacts.
- Modern Application: These principles are fundamental to:
- Circular economy: Designing products and systems to minimize waste and maximize resource recovery and reuse.
- Sustainable supply chains: Sourcing materials locally and minimizing transportation distances to reduce environmental impact.
- Industrial ecology: Examining industrial systems as interconnected ecosystems, where waste from one process can be used as a resource for another.
Key Takeaway:
While the scale and complexity of industry are vastly different today, the fundamental principles of sustainable technology – resource conservation, environmental stewardship, and long-term thinking – remain just as relevant. By studying the sustainable practices of ancient civilizations, we can gain valuable insights for developing more sustainable industrial systems in the modern world. It’s not about replicating ancient technologies, but about learning from their wisdom and applying those lessons to contemporary challenges.
Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4900 ?
This is a fascinating question that requires us to think a bit outside the box! While “research and development” as we understand it today didn’t exist in 4900 BC, we can explore how the process of developing sustainable technologies might have occurred:
1. Observation and Experimentation:
- Early civilizations were keen observers of their environment. They would have noticed patterns in weather, plant growth, animal behavior, and the availability of resources.
- Based on these observations, they likely experimented with different techniques to improve their lives. For example, they might have tried different ways of planting crops, building shelters, or managing water resources.
- Successful experiments would have been passed down through generations, while less successful ones would have been discarded. This process of trial and error led to the gradual development of sustainable technologies.
2. Knowledge Sharing and Collaboration:
- Communities likely shared knowledge and ideas through oral tradition, storytelling, and practical demonstrations.
- Collaboration would have been essential for large-scale projects like building dams or irrigation systems. This would have fostered the exchange of knowledge and skills, leading to further innovation.
- Trade and exchange with neighboring communities could also have introduced new ideas and technologies.
3. Adaptation and Innovation:
- Environments are constantly changing. Early civilizations had to adapt to variations in climate, resource availability, and other factors.
- This need for adaptation would have driven innovation. For example, if a drought occurred, communities might have developed new ways to conserve water or find alternative sources.
- Over time, these adaptations and innovations would have led to the refinement and improvement of sustainable technologies.
4. Cultural Transmission:
- Sustainable practices were not just technical skills, but also cultural values. Respect for nature, a sense of community, and a long-term perspective were all important aspects of sustainable living.
- These values were transmitted through stories, rituals, and social norms, ensuring that sustainable practices were maintained over time.
Examples of “R&D” in Action:
- Developing new crop varieties: Farmers likely experimented with different seeds and cultivation techniques to develop crops that were better suited to their environment.
- Improving water management: Communities might have tried different ways of building canals, dams, or wells to improve access to water.
- Refining building techniques: Builders likely experimented with different materials and designs to create shelters that were more durable and comfortable.
Key Takeaway:
While formal “R&D” institutions didn’t exist in 4900 BC, the process of developing sustainable technologies was driven by observation, experimentation, collaboration, adaptation, and cultural transmission. This ongoing process of learning and innovation allowed early civilizations to thrive in their environments and build a foundation for future generations.
courtesy : NPTEL-NOC IITM
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.