81 / 100

Sustainable technology of 4960

Several technologies have emerged as potential game-changers in the quest for sustainability. These include:

  • Artificial intelligence (AI): AI can optimize energy consumption, predict equipment failures, and improve resource management in various industries.
  • Internet of Things (IoT): IoT devices can monitor and control energy usage in homes and buildings, leading to significant energy savings.
  • Renewable energy technologies: Solar, wind, and hydropower continue to advance, becoming more efficient and cost-effective.
  • Advanced materials: New materials like graphene and bio-based plastics offer sustainable alternatives to traditional materials.
  • Biotechnology: Biotechnology can create sustainable solutions in agriculture, waste management, and manufacturing.

These technologies are just a glimpse of the many innovations driving us toward a more sustainable future.

What is Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

Unfortunately, I cannot provide you with specific information about sustainable technology in the year 4960.

Here’s why:

  • Future is unpredictable: Predicting specific technologies over 2,900 years into the future is impossible. Technological advancements are rapid and often unexpected.
  • Limited information: I don’t have access to any reliable information or predictions about what technology will be like that far in the future.

However, I can speculate on some general trends and possibilities based on current trends:

  • Highly advanced renewable energy: It’s likely that by 4960, renewable energy sources like solar, wind, and geothermal will be incredibly advanced and efficient, potentially providing all of humanity’s energy needs.
  • Closed-loop systems: Technologies that create closed-loop systems for resource use and waste management may be prevalent, minimizing environmental impact.
  • Biotechnology and biomimicry: We might see extensive use of biotechnology to create sustainable materials, fuels, and even infrastructure inspired by natural processes.
  • Artificial intelligence and automation: AI could play a crucial role in optimizing resource use, predicting environmental changes, and managing complex sustainable systems.

It’s important to remember that these are just educated guesses. The actual sustainable technologies of 4960 could be something entirely different and unimaginable to us today.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

It’s difficult to say definitively who will “require” sustainable technology in 4960, as the needs and priorities of that time are beyond our current comprehension. However, we can make some educated guesses based on current trends and the fundamental principles of sustainability:

Likely “requirers” of sustainable technology in 4960:

  • Humanity (if it still exists in a recognizable form): Even if society has drastically changed, the need for basic resources like energy, food, and shelter will likely remain. Sustainable technologies will be essential for providing these resources without depleting the planet or causing irreversible damage.
  • Other intelligent species (if any): If humanity encounters or evolves alongside other intelligent life forms, they too would likely depend on sustainable technology for their survival and well-being.
  • The planet itself: In a sense, the Earth will “require” sustainable technology to maintain its ecological balance and support life. This might involve technologies that actively restore ecosystems, manage resources, and mitigate the effects of past environmental damage.

Why sustainability will likely be essential:

  • Resource limitations: Even with technological advancements, the resources of our planet (and potentially others) are finite. Sustainable practices will be necessary to ensure long-term access to essential resources.
  • Environmental concerns: The long-term consequences of unsustainable practices are becoming increasingly evident. Future societies will likely need to prioritize environmental protection and restoration to avoid catastrophic changes.
  • Ethical considerations: A sustainable approach recognizes the interconnectedness of all life and the responsibility of present generations to future ones. This ethical framework will likely guide technological development and resource management in the future.

It’s important to remember:

  • Unpredictability of the future: The specific needs and priorities of 4960 are unknown. It’s possible that entirely new challenges and considerations will arise, requiring innovative solutions that we cannot even imagine today.
  • Evolution of technology and society: Both technology and society will continue to evolve in unpredictable ways. This evolution could lead to new understandings of sustainability and new approaches to achieving it.

Ultimately, while we can’t know for sure who will “require” sustainable technology in 4960, it’s highly likely that the principles of sustainability will remain crucial for the well-being of life on Earth and beyond.

When is required Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

While we can’t pinpoint an exact date for when sustainable technology will be absolutely “required” in 4960, we can discuss the factors that will likely make it essential and when those factors might come into play.

Factors making sustainable technology essential in 4960 (and likely much sooner):

  • Depletion of finite resources: Even with technological advancements, many resources are finite. As these resources become scarcer, sustainable technologies that rely on renewable sources and closed-loop systems will become increasingly necessary.
  • Environmental degradation: The long-term consequences of unsustainable practices, such as climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, will likely intensify over time. Sustainable technologies will be crucial for mitigating these effects and restoring ecological balance.
  • Population growth: If the human population continues to grow, the demand for resources like food, water, and energy will increase. Sustainable technologies will be needed to meet these demands without further straining the planet’s resources.
  • Ethical considerations: As societies evolve, there will likely be a growing awareness of the interconnectedness of all life and the responsibility to future generations. This ethical framework will likely drive the adoption of sustainable technologies.

When will sustainable technology be “required”?

It’s not a question of a single point in time, but rather a gradual shift. The need for sustainable technology is already becoming increasingly urgent as we face the consequences of past unsustainable practices. In the future, this need will only grow stronger.

By 4960, it’s highly likely that sustainable technology will be absolutely essential for the survival and well-being of any civilization that exists. The exact timeline for when it becomes “required” is less important than the recognition that it is already necessary and will only become more so in the years to come.

In conclusion:

Sustainable technology is not just a futuristic concept; it’s a necessity for the present and the future. While we can’t predict the exact date when it will become absolutely “required,” it’s clear that the need is already upon us and will only intensify as we move forward.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

Where is required Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

This is a fascinating question that requires us to think beyond our current understanding of technology and society! Since we’re speculating about the year 4960, the “where” might be very different from what we know today. Here are some possibilities:

1. Earth:

  • Everywhere: Even if societies have drastically changed, the need for sustainable technology to provide basic resources like energy, food, and shelter will likely remain. This means sustainable tech would be integrated into homes, cities, infrastructure, and even agriculture.
  • Specific regions: Perhaps some regions will be more reliant on specific types of sustainable technology due to their geography or resources. For example, areas with abundant sunlight might heavily utilize advanced solar energy technologies, while others might focus on geothermal or ocean thermal energy.

2. Beyond Earth:

  • Space colonies or habitats: If humanity has expanded beyond Earth, sustainable technology would be crucial for establishing and maintaining self-sufficient colonies or habitats on other planets or celestial bodies. This would involve technologies for resource extraction, life support, and even terraforming.
  • Other planets or moons: It’s possible that in 4960, humans (or other intelligent species) might be utilizing sustainable technology to explore and even inhabit other planets or moons.
  • Space-based infrastructure: Sustainable technology could be essential for maintaining space-based infrastructure, such as space elevators, orbital habitats, or even interstellar travel.

3. Virtual or digital realms:

  • Metaverses or simulated realities: If societies have transitioned significantly into virtual or digital realms, sustainable technology might be needed to maintain these virtual environments. This could involve technologies for energy-efficient computing, data storage, and even creating sustainable virtual ecosystems.

4. Unknown or unimaginable locations:

  • Dimensions or realities beyond our current understanding: It’s possible that in 4960, our understanding of the universe and reality will be vastly different. Sustainable technology might be required in locations or dimensions that we cannot even conceive of today.

Important considerations:

  • Evolution of technology and society: The “where” of sustainable technology in 4960 will depend heavily on how technology and society evolve over the next 2,900 years.
  • Interconnectedness: It’s likely that sustainable technology will be needed in a highly interconnected way, regardless of the specific location. For example, energy systems, resource management, and environmental protection will likely be integrated across different regions and even planets.

Ultimately, while we can’t know for sure where sustainable technology will be required in 4960, it’s safe to say that its principles will be essential for the long-term well-being of any civilization, regardless of their location or form.

How is required Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

It’s impossible to know precisely how sustainable technology will be “required” in 4960, as that depends on the state of society, technology, and the environment at that time. However, we can speculate based on current trends and the fundamental principles of sustainability:

1. Integration into all aspects of life: Sustainable technology won’t likely be a separate field but rather deeply integrated into every facet of existence. Think of it less as “sustainable technology” and more as just “technology,” where sustainability is a core principle of design and function.

2. Decentralized and localized systems: We might see a move away from centralized systems (like large power plants) towards more decentralized and localized solutions. This could involve microgrids, community-based renewable energy generation, and local resource management.

3. Closed-loop systems: Technologies that mimic natural ecosystems by creating closed-loop systems for resource use and waste management are likely to be prevalent. This means minimizing waste, reusing materials, and creating circular economies.

4. Advanced materials and biomimicry: Materials science could play a crucial role, with the development of incredibly durable, biodegradable, or self-healing materials. Biomimicry, where technology is inspired by natural processes, might be widely used for creating sustainable solutions.

5. Artificial intelligence and automation: AI could be instrumental in optimizing resource use, predicting environmental changes, and managing complex sustainable systems. Automation could also play a role in implementing and maintaining these systems.

6. Biotechnology and synthetic biology: These fields could provide solutions for sustainable agriculture, biomanufacturing, and even environmental remediation. We might see the use of engineered organisms to produce biofuels, clean up pollution, or create sustainable materials.

7. Social and ethical considerations: How technology is “required” will also depend on social and ethical factors. Sustainable technology will likely be tied to concepts of social justice, equitable resource distribution, and intergenerational responsibility. Perhaps systems will be in place to ensure fair access and prevent misuse.

8. Adaptability and resilience: Given the potential for unpredictable environmental changes, technologies that are adaptable and resilient will be crucial. This means systems that can withstand extreme weather events, adapt to changing resource availability, and recover from disruptions.

9. Potentially unimaginable technologies: It’s also entirely possible that by 4960, technologies will exist that we cannot even conceive of today. These could be based on scientific discoveries and principles that are currently unknown to us.

In summary:

The “how” of sustainable technology in 4960 will likely involve a combination of advanced scientific knowledge, innovative engineering, and a strong ethical framework. It will be deeply integrated into all aspects of life, focusing on efficiency, resilience, and minimizing environmental impact. It’s a future we can only speculate about, but the principles of sustainability will likely remain central to how technology is developed and used.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

It’s tricky to create a specific case study for sustainable technology in 4960, as that would require detailed knowledge of the world and its technology at that time. However, we can construct a hypothetical case study based on current trends and the principles of sustainability.

Hypothetical Case Study: The Great Lakes Restoration Project – 4960

Background:

By 4960, centuries of industrial activity and environmental changes have severely impacted the Great Lakes region of North America. Once a vital freshwater ecosystem, it is now struggling with pollution, invasive species, and the effects of climate change.

The Solution:

A multinational consortium, the “Great Lakes Restoration Initiative,” undertakes a massive project to revitalize the region. This project relies on a suite of advanced sustainable technologies:

  • Advanced bioremediation: Genetically engineered microorganisms are deployed to break down pollutants and restore the natural balance of the ecosystem. These organisms are self-regulating and designed to have minimal impact on the surrounding environment.
  • Smart water management: A network of AI-powered sensors and automated systems monitors water levels, quality, and flow throughout the Great Lakes basin. This allows for precise management of water resources and prevents both floods and droughts.
  • Renewable energy integration: The entire region is powered by a network of renewable energy sources, including advanced solar, wind, and geothermal technologies. These sources are integrated into a smart grid that optimizes energy distribution and minimizes waste.
  • Sustainable agriculture: Advanced agricultural techniques, such as vertical farming and hydroponics, are used to produce food locally and sustainably. These methods minimize water and land use while eliminating the need for harmful pesticides and fertilizers.
  • Closed-loop manufacturing: Industries in the region adopt closed-loop manufacturing processes, where resources are used and reused endlessly. This minimizes waste and pollution while creating a circular economy.

Results:

  • Ecosystem restoration: The Great Lakes ecosystem is significantly restored, with cleaner water, thriving fish populations, and the return of native species.
  • Economic revitalization: The region experiences an economic boom as new sustainable industries emerge and create jobs.
  • Improved quality of life: The people living in the Great Lakes region enjoy a higher quality of life with access to clean water, fresh food, and a healthy environment.

Lessons Learned:

  • Long-term vision: The success of the Great Lakes Restoration Project demonstrates the importance of long-term vision and commitment to sustainability.
  • Technological innovation: Advanced sustainable technologies are essential for addressing complex environmental challenges.
  • Collaboration: International cooperation and collaboration between governments, industries, and communities are crucial for achieving sustainability goals.

Conclusion:

The Great Lakes Restoration Project serves as a model for how sustainable technology can be used to revitalize damaged ecosystems and create a thriving future for both humans and the environment.

Remember: This is just a hypothetical case study. The actual sustainable technologies of 4960 could be very different. However, the principles of sustainability, such as resource efficiency, environmental protection, and social responsibility, will likely remain crucial for any successful future endeavor.

COURTESY : Bernard Marr

White paper on Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

White Paper: Envisioning Sustainable Technology in 4960

Abstract:

Predicting the specifics of technology nearly three millennia into the future is inherently speculative. However, by extrapolating current trends, fundamental principles of sustainability, and considering potential societal shifts, we can construct a plausible vision of sustainable technology in 4960. This white paper explores potential technological advancements, societal structures, and ethical considerations that might shape the landscape of sustainability in that distant future.

1. Introduction:

The pursuit of sustainability is a continuous journey. While current efforts focus on mitigating the effects of climate change and resource depletion, the challenges of 4960 will likely be vastly different. This paper explores possible scenarios and technological advancements that might define sustainability in that era. It acknowledges the inherent limitations of forecasting so far into the future but aims to stimulate thought and discussion about long-term sustainability goals.

2. Core Principles of Sustainability in 4960:

We can assume that the core principles of sustainability will remain relevant, albeit potentially expressed through different technologies and practices. These principles likely include:

  • Resource Circularity: Closed-loop systems will be paramount, minimizing waste and maximizing resource reuse.
  • Ecological Harmony: Technologies will be designed to integrate seamlessly with natural ecosystems, minimizing disruption and promoting biodiversity.
  • Social Equity: Sustainable practices will prioritize equitable access to resources and opportunities for all members of society.
  • Intergenerational Responsibility: A deep ethical commitment to preserving the planet for future generations will guide technological development.

3. Potential Technological Landscape:

  • Energy: Fusion power, or other currently unknown energy sources, may be readily available, providing clean and abundant energy. Decentralized energy grids and localized energy generation will likely be the norm. Energy harvesting from ambient sources (vibrations, temperature differentials, etc.) may also be highly advanced.
  • Materials: Advanced biomaterials, self-healing materials, and metamaterials could be commonplace. Resource extraction from planets or asteroids may be highly refined and sustainable.
  • Manufacturing: Nanotechnology and 4D printing could allow for on-demand manufacturing of complex products with minimal waste. Biomanufacturing, using biological systems to produce materials and products, could be widely used.
  • Agriculture: Vertical farming, aeroponics, and other highly efficient agricultural methods may be integrated into urban environments, ensuring food security and minimizing land use. Personalized nutrition, tailored to individual needs and produced locally, could be common.
  • Transportation: Personal transportation could be largely replaced by highly efficient and sustainable public transportation systems, potentially involving advanced air or space travel. Individual mobility may be facilitated by highly personalized, adaptable, and sustainable devices.
  • Information and Communication: Quantum computing and other advanced computing paradigms could enable highly efficient data storage and processing, minimizing energy consumption. Brain-computer interfaces and other advanced communication technologies could be commonplace.
  • Environmental Management: Geoengineering technologies, if needed, will likely be highly refined and carefully managed to mitigate climate change and restore ecosystems. Advanced monitoring systems will provide real-time data on environmental conditions.

4. Societal Considerations:

  • Governance: Global cooperation and collaboration will be essential for addressing global sustainability challenges.
  • Ethics: Advanced ethical frameworks will be needed to guide the development and use of powerful technologies, ensuring they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.
  • Education: Education systems will likely focus on fostering critical thinking, creativity, and a deep understanding of sustainability principles.

5. Challenges and Opportunities:

  • Technological Disruption: Rapid technological advancements could create unforeseen challenges, requiring careful planning and adaptation.
  • Resource Management: Even with advanced technologies, careful management of resources will be crucial to ensure long-term sustainability.
  • Ethical Dilemmas: New technologies could raise complex ethical questions that will need to be addressed thoughtfully.

6. Conclusion:

While predicting the future is an exercise in imagination, envisioning potential scenarios can help us prepare for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. By focusing on the core principles of sustainability and fostering innovation, we can work towards a future where technology serves humanity and the planet. The specific technologies of 4960 may be beyond our current comprehension, but the commitment to a sustainable future must begin today.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

You’re asking about the industrial applications of sustainable technology in 4960! That’s a fun thought experiment. While we can’t know for sure, here are some plausible scenarios based on current trends and the likely needs of a future society:

1. Advanced Manufacturing & Resource Circularity:

  • Nanotechnology & 4D Printing: Imagine factories that can create almost anything on demand, using minimal resources and producing zero waste. Nanotechnology could allow for the manipulation of matter at the atomic level, while 4D printing could create objects that change shape over time in response to stimuli. This could revolutionize manufacturing, making it highly efficient and adaptable.
  • Biomanufacturing: Industries might utilize biological systems to produce materials, chemicals, and even complex products. Imagine growing materials like plastics or fabrics in bioreactors, using renewable resources and minimizing environmental impact.
  • Closed-loop Production: Factories could operate on closed-loop systems, where waste is eliminated by being reused or repurposed within the production process. This would require advanced recycling technologies and the ability to break down materials into their basic components for reuse.

2. Energy & Resource Management:

  • Fusion Power & Advanced Energy Storage: Abundant clean energy could be available through fusion power or other currently unknown energy sources. Advanced energy storage technologies would allow for efficient distribution and use of this energy, even in remote locations or during periods of low energy generation.
  • Smart Grids & AI Optimization: AI-powered smart grids could manage energy distribution and consumption in real-time, optimizing efficiency and minimizing waste. These grids could also integrate various renewable energy sources, such as solar, wind, and geothermal, seamlessly.
  • Resource Extraction & Recycling: Industries might have developed highly efficient and sustainable methods for extracting resources from planets, asteroids, or even the ocean. Advanced recycling technologies would be essential for recovering valuable materials from waste streams and ensuring resource circularity.

3. Environmental Remediation & Protection:

  • Advanced Bioremediation: Genetically engineered microorganisms could be used to clean up pollution and restore damaged ecosystems. These organisms could be designed to break down specific pollutants or even absorb excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
  • Geoengineering Technologies: If necessary, highly refined geoengineering technologies could be used to mitigate climate change and protect the environment. These technologies would need to be carefully managed to avoid unintended consequences.
  • Environmental Monitoring & Management: Advanced sensor networks and AI-powered systems could monitor environmental conditions in real-time, providing early warnings of potential problems and enabling proactive management of ecosystems.

4. Sustainable Agriculture & Food Production:

  • Vertical Farming & Controlled Environment Agriculture: Food production could take place in highly efficient vertical farms or controlled environment agriculture facilities, minimizing land use and water consumption. These facilities could be located in urban areas, ensuring access to fresh, locally grown food.
  • Precision Agriculture & Automation: Advanced technologies could be used to optimize agricultural practices, such as irrigation, fertilization, and pest control. Automated systems could perform tasks like planting, harvesting, and weeding, increasing efficiency and reducing labor costs.
  • Alternative Protein Sources: Industries might produce alternative protein sources, such as cultured meat or insect-based protein, to reduce the environmental impact of traditional livestock farming.

5. Transportation & Infrastructure:

  • Sustainable Transportation Systems: Industries could rely on highly efficient and sustainable transportation systems, such as advanced maglev trains or even space-based transportation. These systems would minimize energy consumption and reduce pollution.
  • Self-healing Infrastructure: Infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, and buildings, could be made from self-healing materials that can repair themselves automatically, reducing maintenance costs and increasing durability.

Important Considerations:

  • Integration: Sustainable technologies would likely be integrated across different industries, creating a highly interconnected and efficient system.
  • Automation: Automation and AI would play a significant role in optimizing industrial processes and managing resources.
  • Ethical Considerations: Ethical frameworks would be essential for guiding the development and use of these technologies, ensuring they are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.

While these are just speculations, they highlight the potential for sustainable technology to revolutionize industries in the future. By focusing on resource efficiency, environmental protection, and social responsibility, we can create a world where technology serves both humanity and the planet.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 4960 ?

Research and development (R&D) in sustainable technology for 4960 would likely be vastly different from what we see today. Here are some speculative areas of focus, keeping in mind the long timescale and potential for unforeseen breakthroughs:

1. Fundamental Science & New Paradigms:

  • Beyond Current Physics: R&D might explore areas beyond our current understanding of physics, potentially harnessing new forces or dimensions for energy production, material science, or even transportation.
  • Consciousness & Technology: Research could delve into the intersection of consciousness and technology, potentially leading to new forms of energy generation, communication, or even environmental management.
  • Unified Theories: The pursuit of unified theories that connect all forces of nature could unlock new ways to manipulate matter and energy at the most fundamental level, leading to revolutionary sustainable technologies.

2. Advanced Materials & Manufacturing:

  • Programmable Matter: R&D could focus on creating programmable matter that can be manipulated at the atomic level to form any desired object. This could revolutionize manufacturing, making it highly adaptable and resource-efficient.
  • Self-Healing & Adaptive Materials: Research might lead to the development of materials that can self-heal from damage or even adapt their properties in response to changing conditions. This could have applications in infrastructure, transportation, and even personal devices.
  • Biologically Inspired Materials: R&D could draw inspiration from nature to create new materials with unique properties, such as extreme strength, flexibility, or biodegradability.

3. Energy & Resource Management:

  • Exotic Energy Sources: R&D might explore harnessing energy from exotic sources, such as zero-point energy or dark matter, potentially providing clean and abundant energy for millennia to come.
  • Energy Storage & Transmission: Research could focus on developing highly efficient and sustainable methods for storing and transmitting energy, enabling the use of renewable energy sources even in remote locations.
  • Planetary Resource Management: R&D might involve developing technologies for sustainably extracting and utilizing resources from other planets or celestial bodies, ensuring access to essential materials for future generations.

4. Environmental Science & Restoration:

  • Advanced Geoengineering: Research could focus on developing highly refined geoengineering techniques to mitigate climate change and restore damaged ecosystems. These techniques would need to be carefully studied and managed to avoid unintended consequences.
  • Ecosystem Engineering: R&D might explore ways to actively engineer and manage ecosystems to enhance their resilience and ability to provide essential services, such as clean water and air.
  • Planetary-Scale Sustainability: Research could address the challenge of achieving sustainability on a planetary scale, considering the interconnectedness of all ecosystems and the need for global cooperation.

5. Biotechnology & Synthetic Biology:

  • Programmable Biology: R&D might lead to the ability to program biological systems to perform specific tasks, such as producing biofuels, cleaning up pollution, or even creating new materials.
  • Synthetic Ecosystems: Research could explore creating synthetic ecosystems that can be used to study ecological processes and develop sustainable solutions for environmental challenges.
  • Human-Nature Integration: R&D might focus on developing technologies that allow humans to live in closer harmony with nature, such as bio-integrated interfaces or even the ability to directly interact with ecosystems.

Important Considerations:

  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration: R&D in sustainable technology for 4960 would require collaboration across many disciplines, including physics, biology, materials science, computer science, and even social sciences and ethics.
  • Long-Term Perspective: Research would need to take a very long-term perspective, considering the potential impacts of technologies on future generations and the need for sustainable solutions that can last for centuries or even millennia.
  • Ethical Frameworks: Robust ethical frameworks would be essential for guiding R&D in sustainable technology, ensuring that new technologies are used responsibly and for the benefit of all.

While it’s impossible to predict the exact direction of R&D in sustainable technology for 4960, these are some potential areas of focus. The key will be to combine scientific curiosity with a deep commitment to sustainability and ethical responsibility, ensuring that future generations inherit a healthy and thriving planet.

COURTESY : NPTEL-NOC IITM

References

  1. Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r Purvis, Ben; Mao, Yong; Robinson, Darren (2019). “Three pillars of sustainability: in search of conceptual origins”Sustainability Science14 (3): 681–695. Bibcode:2019SuSc…14..681Pdoi:10.1007/s11625-018-0627-5ISSN 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 Ethics28 (6): 1075–1087. Bibcode:2015JAEE…28.1075Rdoi:10.1007/s10806-015-9578-3ISSN 1187-7863S2CID 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:10.1017/9781009082945.007ISBN 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”Sustainability2 (8): 2424–2448. doi:10.3390/su2082424hdl:10535/6499ISSN 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 978-0-429-57873-1OCLC 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?”Sustainability2 (11): 3436–3448. doi:10.3390/su2113436ISSN 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 & Policy112: 236–244. Bibcode:2020ESPol.112..236Vdoi:10.1016/j.envsci.2020.06.016PMC 7330600PMID 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?”Sustainability9 (2): 165. doi:10.3390/su9020165hdl:10453/90953ISSN 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 Change68: 102222. Bibcode:2021GEC….6802222Adoi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102222ISSN 0959-3780.
  20. Jump up to:a b c Benson, Melinda Harm; Craig, Robin Kundis (2014). “End of Sustainability”Society & Natural Resources27 (7): 777–782. Bibcode:2014SNatR..27..777Bdoi:10.1080/08941920.2014.901467ISSN 0894-1920S2CID 67783261.
  21. Jump up to:a b c Stockholm+50: Unlocking a Better FutureStockholm Environment Institute (Report). 18 May 2022. doi:10.51414/sei2022.011S2CID 248881465.
  22. Jump up to:a b Scoones, Ian (2016). “The Politics of Sustainability and Development”Annual Review of Environment and Resources41 (1): 293–319. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-090039ISSN 1543-5938S2CID 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 Geography2 (4): 365–382. Bibcode:2016PAGeo…2..365Hdoi:10.1080/23754931.2016.1239222ISSN 2375-4931S2CID 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 Policy14: 1758–5899.13160. doi:10.1111/1758-5899.13160ISSN 1758-5880S2CID 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 Optimization8: 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 Conservation14 (2): 101–110. Bibcode:1987EnvCo..14..101Bdoi:10.1017/S0376892900011449ISSN 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 0-9712418-1-3OCLC 49987854.
  45. ^ Ekins, Paul; Zenghelis, Dimitri (2021). “The costs and benefits of environmental sustainability”Sustainability Science16 (3): 949–965. Bibcode:2021SuSc…16..949Edoi:10.1007/s11625-021-00910-5PMC 7960882PMID 33747239.
  46. ^ William L. Thomas, ed. (1956). Man’s role in changing the face of the earth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-79604-3OCLC 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 Science41 (251): 237–276. doi:10.1080/14786449608620846ISSN 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”BioScience67 (12): 1026–1028. doi:10.1093/biosci/bix125hdl:11336/71342ISSN 0006-3568.
  52. ^ Crutzen, Paul J. (2002). “Geology of mankind”Nature415 (6867): 23. Bibcode:2002Natur.415…23Cdoi:10.1038/415023aISSN 0028-0836PMID 11780095S2CID 9743349.
  53. Jump up to:a b Wilhelm Krull, ed. (2000). Zukunftsstreit (in German). Weilerwist: Velbrück Wissenschaft. ISBN 3-934730-17-5OCLC 52639118.
  54. ^ Redclift, Michael (2005). “Sustainable development (1987-2005): an oxymoron comes of age”Sustainable Development13 (4): 212–227. doi:10.1002/sd.281ISSN 0968-0802.
  55. ^ Daly, Herman E. (1996). Beyond growth: the economics of sustainable development (PDF). Boston: Beacon PressISBN 0-8070-4708-2OCLC 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”Sustainability8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878.
  60. ^ Doğu, Feriha Urfalı; Aras, Lerzan (2019). “Measuring Social Sustainability with the Developed MCSA Model: Güzelyurt Case”Sustainability11 (9): 2503. doi:10.3390/su11092503ISSN 2071-1050.
  61. ^ Davidson, Mark (2010). “Social Sustainability and the City: Social sustainability and city”Geography Compass4 (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 Production140: 42–52. Bibcode:2017JCPro.140…42Mdoi: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”Sustainability8 (9): 878. doi:10.3390/su8090878ISSN 2071-1050.
  64. ^ James, Paul; with Magee, Liam; Scerri, Andy; Steger, Manfred B. (2015). Urban Sustainability in Theory and Practice: Circles of Sustainability. London: RoutledgeISBN 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 Sustainability15 (1): 225–243. Bibcode:2013EDSus..15..225Mdoi:10.1007/s10668-012-9384-2S2CID 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 Sustainability43: 77–82. Bibcode:2020COES…43…77Vdoi:10.1016/j.cosust.2020.04.003S2CID 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_2760-1ISBN 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 Economics8 (2): 103–108. Bibcode:1993EcoEc…8..103Pdoi:10.1016/0921-8009(93)90039-9.
  74. ^ Ayres, Robert; van den Berrgh, Jeroen; Gowdy, John (2001). “Strong versus Weak Sustainability”. Environmental Ethics23 (2): 155–168. doi:10.5840/enviroethics200123225ISSN 0163-4275.
  75. ^ Cabeza Gutés, Maite (1996). “The concept of weak sustainability”Ecological Economics17 (3): 147–156. Bibcode:1996EcoEc..17..147Cdoi:10.1016/S0921-8009(96)80003-6.
  76. ^ Bosselmann, Klaus (2017). The principle of sustainability: transforming law and governance (2nd ed.). London: RoutledgeISBN 978-1-4724-8128-3OCLC 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: RoutledgeISBN 9781315765747.
  79. Jump up to:a b Hardyment, Richard (2 February 2024). Measuring Good Business. London: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781003457732ISBN 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”Sustainability11 (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 & Technology56 (3): 1510–1521. Bibcode:2022EnST…56.1510Pdoi:10.1021/acs.est.1c04158ISSN 0013-936XPMC 8811958PMID 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 Communications11 (1): 3107. Bibcode:2020NatCo..11.3107Wdoi:10.1038/s41467-020-16941-yISSN 2041-1723PMC 7305220PMID 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 PressISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7OCLC 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 HouseISBN 978-1-84794-138-1OCLC 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-14ISSN 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 Governance11: 100131. Bibcode:2022ESGov..1100131Pdoi: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:10.2800/641030ISBN 9789294800862.
  99. ^ Noura Guimarães, Lucas (2020). “Introduction”. The regulation and policy of Latin American energy transitions. Elsevier. pp. xxix–xxxviii. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819521-5.00026-7ISBN 978-0-12-819521-5S2CID 241093198.
  100. ^ Kuenkel, Petra (2019). Stewarding Sustainability Transformations: An Emerging Theory and Practice of SDG Implementation. Cham: Springer. ISBN 978-3-030-03691-1OCLC 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 Nexus3 (4): pgae106. doi:10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae106PMC 10986754PMID 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 Letters15 (6): 065003. Bibcode:2020ERL….15f5003Hdoi:10.1088/1748-9326/ab842aISSN 1748-9326S2CID 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 PressISBN 978-1-4416-0111-7OCLC 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 978-0-321-41753-4OCLC 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 Biology10 (10): e1001405. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001405ISSN 1544-9173PMC 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…11Gdoi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007ISSN 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 Production314: 127973. Bibcode:2021JCPro.31427973Ndoi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127973ISSN 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 978-1-59869-425-3OCLC 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 Discourse7 (1): 42–61. doi:10.1080/23269995.2017.1300415ISSN 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”Sustainability15 (20): 15054. doi:10.3390/su152015054ISSN 2071-1050.

Recommended HashTags

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »