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

Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

The International Standard on Sustainability Assurance 5000 (ISSA 5000) is a comprehensive, stand-alone standard for any sustainability assurance engagements. It applies to sustainability information reported across any sustainability topic and prepared under multiple frameworks. The standard is also profession agnostic, supporting its use by both professional accountant and non-accountant assurance practitioners.  

What is Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

While there isn’t a specific “Sustainable Technology of 5000”, it’s likely you’re interested in the broader concept of sustainable technology in the context of societal and technological advancement. Here’s a breakdown of what that entails:

Sustainable Technology for Society 5.0

  • Society 5.0 is a concept representing a human-centered, technology-driven society where cyber and physical spaces are highly integrated. It aims to achieve economic advancement while resolving social issues.
  • Sustainable technology within Society 5.0 focuses on creating and using technologies that meet present needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own.

Key Areas of Sustainable Technology in Society 5.0

Challenges and Considerations

  • Balancing technological advancement with environmental protection: Ensuring that progress doesn’t come at the cost of ecological damage.
  • Addressing social equity: Making sure that the benefits of sustainable technology are accessible to all, not just a privileged few.
  • Promoting responsible consumption: Encouraging individuals and businesses to adopt sustainable practices in their daily lives.

Overall, sustainable technology in the context of Society 5.0 is a crucial area of focus for creating a future where both human well-being and environmental health are prioritized.

Who is required Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

It seems you might be thinking of ISSA 5000, which is the International Standard on Sustainability Assurance. This standard is relevant to a wide range of stakeholders involved in sustainability reporting and assurance. Here’s who needs to be aware of and potentially utilize ISSA 5000:

  • Companies: Organizations of all sizes that are reporting on their sustainability performance, whether it’s environmental, social, or governance (ESG) information. ISSA 5000 provides a framework for ensuring the credibility and reliability of their sustainability reports.
  • Assurance Providers: These are the professionals who conduct independent reviews of sustainability information. They can be accountants, consultants, or other specialists. ISSA 5000 provides guidance on how to perform these assurance engagements.
  • Investors: Investors rely on sustainability information to make informed decisions. ISSA 5000 helps ensure that the information they use is trustworthy and comparable.
  • Regulators: Regulators are increasingly requiring companies to disclose sustainability information. ISSA 5000 can help companies meet these requirements and ensure consistency in reporting.
  • Standard Setters: Organizations that develop sustainability reporting frameworks and standards need to consider ISSA 5000 to ensure that their standards are auditable and can be used for assurance engagements.

In essence, ISSA 5000 is relevant to anyone who is involved in the creation, use, or oversight of sustainability information. It aims to enhance the credibility and transparency of sustainability reporting, which is crucial for building trust and driving progress towards a more sustainable future.

Key takeaways about ISSA 5000:

  • It’s a global standard that can be applied to any sustainability topic and framework.
  • It’s designed to be used by both accountants and non-accountant assurance practitioners.
  • It promotes consistency and rigor in sustainability assurance engagements.
  • It helps ensure that sustainability information is reliable and decision-useful.

By understanding and utilizing ISSA 5000, stakeholders can contribute to a more sustainable and accountable world.

When is required Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

While it seems you’re interested in the timing around ISSA 5000, it’s important to clarify that ISSA 5000 is a standard for how to conduct sustainability assurance engagements, not a technology itself.

That said, here’s a timeline of key milestones related to ISSA 5000:

  • September 20, 2024: ISSA 5000 was officially approved by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB).
  • December 2024: The formal publication of the standard is expected, following final certification by the Public Interest Oversight Board (PIOB).
  • January 2025: The IAASB will release guidance and application materials to help organizations implement the standard effectively.
  • Early 2025: ISSA 5000 is expected to be widely used, aligning with the first round of official reporting under frameworks like the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).

In essence, the time to be aware of and potentially utilize ISSA 5000 is now, as it’s being finalized and prepared for implementation. Companies that are already reporting on their sustainability performance or are preparing to do so will need to understand ISSA 5000 to ensure their reports can be reliably assured.

Key things to remember about the timing:

  • ISSA 5000 is coming into effect soon, so organizations need to prepare.
  • It will play a crucial role in ensuring the credibility of sustainability reporting.
  • Understanding and applying ISSA 5000 will be essential for companies, assurance providers, and other stakeholders involved in sustainability information.

By staying informed about ISSA 5000 and its timeline, you can ensure that you’re ready to meet the evolving demands of sustainability reporting and assurance.

COURTESY : SUSTAINABLE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS

Where is required Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

While the core principles of ISSA 5000 are universally applicable, its specific implementation and adoption can vary across different regions and jurisdictions. Here’s a breakdown of where ISSA 5000 is likely to be required or influential:

1. Jurisdictions with Mandatory Sustainability Reporting:

  • European Union (EU): With the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) coming into effect, companies within the EU will be required to obtain assurance on their sustainability reports. ISSA 5000 is expected to be a key standard for these assurance engagements.
  • Other regions with emerging regulations: As more countries and regions introduce mandatory sustainability reporting requirements, ISSA 5000 is likely to be adopted or used as a benchmark for local assurance standards.

2. Global Companies and Organizations:

  • Companies operating internationally: Businesses that report on their sustainability performance globally will find ISSA 5000 valuable for ensuring consistency and comparability across different regions.
  • Organizations seeking to enhance credibility: Even in the absence of mandatory regulations, organizations that want to demonstrate their commitment to sustainability and build trust with stakeholders may choose to adopt ISSA 5000 for their assurance engagements.

3. Regions with Strong Focus on Sustainability:

  • Regions with active investor communities: Investors are increasingly demanding reliable sustainability information. ISSA 5000 can help ensure that the information they receive is trustworthy and decision-useful.
  • Regions with developed sustainability frameworks: ISSA 5000 can complement and support existing sustainability reporting frameworks and initiatives in different regions.

It’s important to note that the adoption and implementation of ISSA 5000 can be influenced by:

  • Local regulations and legal frameworks: Each jurisdiction may have its own specific requirements for sustainability reporting and assurance.
  • Cultural and market factors: The level of awareness and demand for sustainability information can vary across different regions.
  • The capacity of assurance providers: The availability of qualified professionals who can conduct assurance engagements in accordance with ISSA 5000.

In conclusion, while ISSA 5000 is a globally recognized standard, its specific application and adoption can vary. However, its influence is expected to grow as sustainability reporting and assurance become more prevalent worldwide.

How is required Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

It seems you’re asking about how ISSA 5000 is applied in practice. Here’s a breakdown of the key steps involved in a sustainability assurance engagement under ISSA 5000:

1. Planning and Scoping:

  • Define objectives: Clearly establish the goals of the assurance engagement, including the specific sustainability information to be covered and the level of assurance desired (limited or reasonable).
  • Determine scope: Identify the boundaries of the reporting entity and the specific sustainability topics to be included in the assurance engagement.
  • Assess risks: Evaluate the potential risks of material misstatement in the sustainability information, considering factors such as the complexity of the reporting process and the inherent limitations of the data.

2. Performing Procedures:

  • Gather evidence: Collect sufficient and appropriate evidence to support the conclusions reached in the assurance engagement. This may involve:
    • Inspecting records: Reviewing documents, data, and internal reports related to sustainability performance.
    • Observing processes: Observing and documenting the entity’s sustainability-related activities and controls.
    • Inquiring of personnel: Interviewing individuals responsible for sustainability reporting and related processes.
    • Performing analytical procedures: Analyzing data to identify trends, anomalies, or potential misstatements.
    • Obtaining external confirmations: Seeking independent verification of information from third parties.
  • Evaluate evidence: Assess the reliability and relevance of the evidence gathered, considering factors such as the source of the information and the potential for bias.

3. Forming Conclusions:

  • Evaluate results: Analyze the evidence gathered and consider the identified risks to determine whether the sustainability information is materially misstated.
  • Form an opinion: Based on the evaluation of the evidence, form a conclusion about whether the sustainability information is fairly presented, in all material respects, in accordance with the applicable reporting framework.

4. Reporting:

  • Issue an assurance report: Communicate the findings of the assurance engagement in a written report, which should include:
    • An identification of the sustainability information that was assured.
    • A statement of the level of assurance provided (limited or reasonable).
    • A description of the procedures performed.
    • The assurance opinion.
    • Any limitations or qualifications to the opinion.

Key Considerations:

  • Materiality: ISSA 5000 emphasizes the concept of materiality, which refers to the significance of a misstatement in the sustainability information. The assurance provider should consider both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of materiality when planning and performing the engagement.
  • Professional skepticism: The assurance provider should maintain a questioning mind and critically assess the evidence gathered throughout the engagement.
  • Independence: The assurance provider should be independent of the reporting entity to ensure objectivity and impartiality.

By following these steps, assurance providers can conduct robust and credible sustainability assurance engagements in accordance with ISSA 5000, enhancing the reliability and transparency of sustainability information for stakeholders.

Case study is Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

You’re asking for a case study related to ISSA 5000 and sustainable technology. It’s important to understand that ISSA 5000 is a standard for assurance, not a technology itself. Therefore, a case study wouldn’t be of ISSA 5000, but rather using ISSA 5000 to assure information about a company’s sustainable technology.

Here’s a hypothetical case study illustrating how ISSA 5000 might be applied:

Case Study: Assuring the Sustainability Report of “SolarTech Innovations”

Background:

SolarTech Innovations is a company specializing in developing and manufacturing high-efficiency solar panels. They have released their first comprehensive sustainability report, covering their environmental impact, social initiatives, and governance practices. They want to obtain independent assurance on this report to enhance its credibility and build trust with investors and other stakeholders.

The Assurance Engagement:

SolarTech Innovations engages an independent assurance provider, “Green Assurance Partners,” to conduct a reasonable assurance engagement in accordance with ISSA 5000.

1. Planning and Scoping:

  • Objective: Provide reasonable assurance on SolarTech’s sustainability report, focusing on the accuracy and completeness of the reported environmental data related to their solar panel production.
  • Scope: The assurance engagement covers the environmental data disclosed in the sustainability report, specifically focusing on greenhouse gas emissions, water usage, and waste generation during the manufacturing process.
  • Risk Assessment: Green Assurance Partners identifies key risk areas, including the complexity of data collection, potential biases in internal reporting, and the reliance on estimations for certain metrics.

2. Performing Procedures:

  • Evidence Gathering:
    • Inspection of Records: Green Assurance Partners reviews SolarTech’s data collection systems, environmental permits, and internal reports related to their manufacturing processes.
    • Observation of Processes: They visit SolarTech’s manufacturing facilities to observe data collection practices, waste management procedures, and environmental controls.
    • Inquiries of Personnel: They interview engineers, environmental managers, and other relevant personnel to understand data collection methodologies and internal controls.
    • Analytical Procedures: They analyze trends in environmental data over time, compare SolarTech’s performance to industry benchmarks, and identify any anomalies or inconsistencies.
    • External Confirmations: They obtain independent verification of energy consumption data from the local utility provider.

3. Forming Conclusions:

  • Evaluation of Results: Green Assurance Partners evaluates the evidence gathered and considers the identified risks. They find that while some data estimations are used, the methodologies are reasonable and consistently applied. They identify minor discrepancies in the reported waste generation data, which SolarTech corrects.
  • Opinion Formation: Based on their evaluation, Green Assurance Partners concludes that SolarTech’s environmental data, related to greenhouse gas emissions, water usage, and waste generation during the manufacturing process, is fairly presented, in all material respects, in accordance with the reporting framework used.

4. Reporting:

  • Assurance Report: Green Assurance Partners issues a reasonable assurance report that:
    • Identifies the sustainability information assured (environmental data related to solar panel production).
    • States the level of assurance provided (reasonable assurance).
    • Describes the procedures performed.
    • Expresses their assurance opinion (as described above).
    • Notes the minor correction made to the waste generation data.

Outcome:

SolarTech Innovations uses the assured sustainability report to communicate its environmental performance to investors and stakeholders. The independent assurance enhances the credibility of the reported data and demonstrates SolarTech’s commitment to transparency and accountability.

Key takeaway: This case study demonstrates how ISSA 5000 provides a framework for conducting a robust and credible sustainability assurance engagement. It highlights the importance of planning, risk assessment, evidence gathering, and professional skepticism in the process. It also shows how assurance can enhance the reliability of sustainability information and build trust with stakeholders.

COURTESY : Tech Evaluate

White paper on Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

White Paper: Sustainable Technology in the Era of Society 5.0

Introduction:

Society 5.0, a vision of a human-centered, technology-driven society, presents both opportunities and challenges for achieving sustainability. This white paper explores the critical role of sustainable technology in realizing the goals of Society 5.0, addressing social issues while driving economic growth. It examines key areas of focus, challenges, and the importance of standardization, particularly in the context of emerging assurance standards like ISSA 5000.

The Convergence of Society 5.0 and Sustainability:

Society 5.0 envisions a future where cyber and physical spaces are seamlessly integrated, leveraging technologies like AI, IoT, and big data to solve societal problems. However, this technological advancement must be grounded in sustainability principles to avoid exacerbating existing environmental and social challenges. Sustainable technology becomes the bridge, ensuring that progress in Society 5.0 contributes to a more equitable and environmentally responsible future.

Key Areas of Sustainable Technology in Society 5.0:

  • Decarbonizing Energy Systems: Transitioning to renewable energy sources like solar, wind, hydro, and geothermal is paramount. Smart grids, energy storage solutions, and demand-side management technologies are crucial for optimizing energy distribution and consumption.
  • Building Smart and Sustainable Cities: Urban centers are hubs of innovation and economic activity, but also significant contributors to environmental impact. Smart city technologies, including intelligent transportation systems, energy-efficient buildings, and optimized waste management, are essential for creating sustainable urban environments.
  • Promoting a Circular Economy: Shifting from a linear “take-make-dispose” model to a circular economy is crucial for resource conservation. Sustainable technologies enable product lifecycle management, waste reduction, reuse, and recycling, minimizing environmental impact.
  • Revolutionizing Agriculture and Food Systems: Precision agriculture, vertical farming, and other innovative technologies can increase food production while minimizing resource use and environmental footprint. Sustainable food systems are essential for ensuring food security and reducing the impact of agriculture on the planet.
  • Transforming Manufacturing and Industry: Sustainable manufacturing practices, including resource efficiency, waste reduction, and the use of eco-friendly materials, are crucial for minimizing the environmental impact of industrial activities. Industry 4.0 technologies, such as automation and data analytics, can play a key role in achieving these goals.

Challenges and Considerations:

  • Balancing Technological Advancement and Environmental Protection: Ensuring that technological progress does not come at the expense of environmental degradation is a critical challenge. Life cycle assessments and environmental impact assessments are crucial for evaluating the sustainability of new technologies.
  • Addressing Social Equity and Inclusivity: The benefits of sustainable technology must be accessible to all members of society, not just a privileged few. Addressing the digital divide and ensuring equitable access to resources and opportunities are essential.
  • Promoting Responsible Consumption and Production: Shifting consumer behavior towards sustainable products and services is crucial. Educating consumers about the environmental impact of their choices and promoting sustainable consumption patterns are essential.
  • Data Privacy and Security: The increasing reliance on data in Society 5.0 raises concerns about privacy and security. Robust data governance frameworks and cybersecurity measures are necessary to protect individuals’ privacy and ensure responsible data use.

The Role of Standardization and Assurance:

As sustainability reporting becomes increasingly important, standardization and assurance play a vital role in ensuring the credibility and reliability of sustainability information. Standards like ISSA 5000 provide a framework for conducting independent assurance engagements on sustainability reports, enhancing transparency and building trust with stakeholders. This is particularly crucial in the context of Society 5.0, where data-driven decision-making requires accurate and reliable information.

Conclusion:

Sustainable technology is not just a set of tools and techniques, but a fundamental shift in mindset. It requires a holistic approach that integrates environmental, social, and economic considerations into all aspects of technological development and deployment. By embracing sustainable technology, Society 5.0 can create a future where technological progress and human well-being are aligned with the health of the planet. Standardization and assurance, as exemplified by ISSA 5000, are essential for ensuring the integrity and trustworthiness of sustainability efforts in this transformative era.

Industrial application of Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

It appears you’re interested in how ISSA 5000 applies to specific industries. While ISSA 5000 is a general standard for sustainability assurance, its application will naturally vary depending on the industry and the specific sustainability issues involved. Here are some examples:

1. Manufacturing:

  • Focus areas: Environmental impact (emissions, waste, resource use), supply chain sustainability (ethical sourcing, labor practices), product lifecycle management.
  • ISSA 5000 application: Assurance providers would examine data on energy consumption, waste generation, and water usage, assess the company’s supply chain due diligence processes, and verify claims about product recyclability or biodegradability.

2. Energy:

  • Focus areas: Greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy generation, environmental impact of extraction or production, community engagement.
  • ISSA 5000 application: Assurance providers would verify emissions data, assess the reliability of renewable energy claims, evaluate environmental impact assessments, and review community consultation processes.

3. Financial Services:

  • Focus areas: Sustainable finance (ESG integration in lending and investment decisions), climate risk assessment, responsible investment practices.
  • ISSA 5000 application: Assurance providers would examine how ESG factors are integrated into financial decision-making, assess the robustness of climate risk assessments, and verify compliance with responsible investment guidelines.

4. Technology:

  • Focus areas: Data privacy and security, ethical AI development, e-waste management, supply chain transparency.
  • ISSA 5000 application: Assurance providers would assess data protection measures, review ethical guidelines for AI development, verify e-waste recycling practices, and examine supply chain traceability.

5. Agriculture:

  • Focus areas: Sustainable farming practices, water management, biodiversity conservation, animal welfare.
  • ISSA 5000 application: Assurance providers would evaluate sustainable farming methods, assess water usage efficiency, verify biodiversity conservation efforts, and review animal welfare standards.

General Considerations:

  • Materiality: The specific sustainability issues that are material to a particular industry will influence the scope of the assurance engagement.
  • Industry-specific standards: Some industries may have their own sustainability reporting frameworks or standards, which will be considered alongside ISSA 5000.
  • Data availability and reliability: The availability and reliability of sustainability data will vary across industries, which can affect the assurance procedures performed.

Key takeaway: ISSA 5000 provides a flexible framework that can be applied to a wide range of industries. However, the specific application of the standard will be tailored to the unique sustainability challenges and opportunities of each sector.

Research and development of Sustainable technology of 5000 ?

You’re interested in the cutting edge of sustainable technology within the framework of Society 5.0! Here’s a look at the exciting research and development happening in this space:

1. Advanced Materials:

  • Nanomaterials: Developing nanomaterials with unique properties for applications in energy storage, water purification, and construction.
  • Bioplastics: Creating biodegradable plastics from renewable resources to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and minimize plastic waste.
  • Smart Materials: Developing materials that can respond to environmental changes, enabling adaptive buildings, self-healing infrastructure, and more.

2. Renewable Energy Technologies:

  • Next-generation Solar: Improving the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of solar cells, exploring perovskite solar cells, and developing innovative solar energy harvesting methods.
  • Advanced Wind Power: Designing larger and more efficient wind turbines, exploring offshore wind farms, and developing airborne wind energy systems.
  • Energy Storage: Developing high-capacity batteries, exploring alternative energy storage solutions like pumped hydro and thermal storage, and improving the integration of renewable energy sources into the grid.

3. Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning:

  • Smart Grids: Using AI to optimize energy distribution, predict energy demand, and integrate renewable energy sources more effectively.
  • Precision Agriculture: Applying AI to analyze data from sensors and satellites to optimize irrigation, fertilization, and pest control, increasing yields while reducing resource use.
  • Circular Economy: Utilizing AI to track materials, optimize recycling processes, and facilitate the reuse of products and components.

4. Internet of Things (IoT) and Smart Systems:

  • Smart Cities: Developing interconnected systems for managing energy, water, transportation, and waste in urban environments, improving efficiency and sustainability.
  • Smart Buildings: Creating buildings that can automatically adjust lighting, heating, and cooling based on occupancy and environmental conditions, reducing energy consumption.
  • Smart Agriculture: Deploying sensors and IoT devices to monitor crop health, soil conditions, and livestock, enabling data-driven decision-making for sustainable farming practices.

5. Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing:

  • Biofuels: Developing advanced biofuels from algae, agricultural waste, and other renewable resources.
  • Bioremediation: Using microorganisms to clean up pollutants and restore contaminated environments.
  • Sustainable Manufacturing: Employing biological processes to produce materials, chemicals, and other products, reducing reliance on fossil fuels and minimizing environmental impact.

Cross-cutting Themes:

  • Life Cycle Assessment: Evaluating the environmental impact of technologies throughout their entire life cycle, from material extraction to end-of-life management.
  • Systems Thinking: Recognizing the interconnectedness of different systems and developing integrated solutions that address multiple sustainability challenges simultaneously.
  • Collaboration and Knowledge Sharing: Fostering collaboration between researchers, industry, and policymakers to accelerate the development and deployment of sustainable technologies.

Looking Ahead:

The research and development of sustainable technology in the context of Society 5.0 is a dynamic and evolving field. Continued investment in research, innovation, and collaboration is crucial for unlocking the full potential of these technologies and creating a truly sustainable future.

COURTESY : TURILYTIX

References

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

Recommended HashTags

Leave a Comment

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

Translate »