IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eko/ekoeko/8_88.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Big Is Ecological Footprint of the Polish Economy?

Author

Listed:
  • Małgorzata Stachowiak
  • Jerzy Śleszyński

Abstract

The ecological footprint concept was conceived by Wackernagel and developed by Wackernagel and Rees to estimate how much biologically productive space people use to sustain themselves. Ecological footprint calculations are based on two assumptions: first, it is possible to keep track of most of the wastes we generate; secondly, most of these resource and waste flows can be converted to a corresponding biologically productive area. Thus, ecological footprint of any defined population (from a single individual to a whole city or country) is the total area of biologically productive land and water occupied exclusively to produce all the resources consumed and to assimilate all the wastes generated by that population, using prevailing technology. Ecological footprinting takes into account arable land separated into cropland, pasture land, and forest. Thus, ecological footprints give a direct comparison between nations regarding the level and patterns of consumption of their citizens. Just as important as the level of consumption is the ecological space which the nation has available. This determines how many people a nation can support at the current lifestyle without, on balance, appropriating ecological space from other nations. The ecological footprinting, for very pragmatic reason, should meet the following criteria: (1) the calculation procedure should be objective and scientifically sound, (2) indicators should have a clear interpretation and be understandable by non-scientists, (3) indicators should relate to clear policy objectives. In the paper we present ecological footprint estimates made for the Polish nation within its border over 1955Ś1997. In this approach we managed to reach numbers comparable with other countries' studies. It appears that Polish footprints do not differ very much from western developed societies. However, as usual in dynamic economies, they seemto be too large when compared to available ecological space. The ecological footprint is one attempt at developing a biologically based ecological economics, which approximates reality better than many economic expansionist models. There are several advantages and limitations associated with the development of the ecological footprint concept. The major advantage of the ecological footprint concept over some other indicators like environmental space is that the former concept gives a clear, unambiguous message often in an easily digested form. The clarity of the message is an important function of any indicator for both policy makers and the general public. Next, the calculation upon which the ecological footprint is based is relatively easy to undertake and much of the data is available at different spatial scales. Nevertheless, the presentation of ecological footprinting needs to be greatly improved. Ecological footprint is a static measure, it ignores technological change, it ignores underground resources, it is a stock measure and does not measure flows, it lacks measures of equity. The energy footprint aspect needs to be tackled by experts in the energy field. More work needs to be done on the vexed question of forest yield factors and sustainability. But despite of the many problems, there remains tremendous potential in the use of ecological footprints for estimating how many people each nation can support in a specified consumption and production patterns.

Suggested Citation

  • Małgorzata Stachowiak & Jerzy Śleszyński, 2002. "How Big Is Ecological Footprint of the Polish Economy?," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 8.
  • Handle: RePEc:eko:ekoeko:8_88
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ekonomia.wne.uw.edu.pl/ekonomia/getFile/487
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrew Ferguson, 1999. "The Logical Foundations of Ecological Footprints," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 149-156, June.
    2. Wackernagel, Mathis & Onisto, Larry & Bello, Patricia & Callejas Linares, Alejandro & Susana Lopez Falfan, Ina & Mendez Garcia, Jesus & Isabel Suarez Guerrero, Ana & Guadalupe Suarez Guerrero, Ma., 1999. "National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 375-390, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2019. "An Axiomatic Characterization of a Generalized Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 033, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology, revised Aug 2019.
    2. Ferng, Jiun-Jiun, 2014. "Nested open systems: An important concept for applying ecological footprint analysis to sustainable development assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 105-111.
    3. Thomas Kuhn & Radomir Pestow & Anja Zenker, 2018. "An Axiomatic Foundation of the Ecological Footprint," Chemnitz Economic Papers 025, Department of Economics, Chemnitz University of Technology.
    4. Ferng, Jiun-Jiun, 2005. "Local sustainable yield and embodied resources in ecological footprint analysis--a case study on the required paddy field in Taiwan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(3), pages 415-430, May.
    5. Gregory Ponthiere, 2009. "The ecological footprint: an exhibit at an intergenerational trial?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 677-694, August.
    6. Colin Hunter, 2002. "Sustainable Tourism and the Touristic Ecological Footprint," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 7-20, March.
    7. Alvarez-Herranz, Agustin & Balsalobre-Lorente, Daniel & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Cantos, José María, 2017. "Energy innovation and renewable energy consumption in the correction of air pollution levels," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 386-397.
    8. Chen, B. & Chen, G.Q., 2007. "Modified ecological footprint accounting and analysis based on embodied exergy--a case study of the Chinese society 1981-2001," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2-3), pages 355-376, March.
    9. Benjamin Leard, 2011. "Joan Martinez-Alier and Ingo Ropke (eds.): Recent developments in ecological economics (2 vols.)," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 161-178, July.
    10. Ella Furness & Harry Nelson, 2016. "Are human values and community participation key to climate adaptation? The case of community forest organisations in British Columbia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 243-259, March.
    11. Kolcava, Dennis & Nguyen, Quynh & Bernauer, Thomas, 2019. "Does trade liberalization lead to environmental burden shifting in the global economy?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 98-112.
    12. Jia, Junsong & Deng, Hongbing & Duan, Jing & Zhao, Jingzhu, 2009. "Analysis of the major drivers of the ecological footprint using the STIRPAT model and the PLS method--A case study in Henan Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(11), pages 2818-2824, September.
    13. Herendeen, Robert A. & Wildermuth, Todd, 2002. "Resource-based sustainability indicators: Chase County, Kansas, as example," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 243-257, August.
    14. Fuyuan Wang & Kaiyong Wang, 2017. "Assessing the Effect of Eco-City Practices on Urban Sustainability Using an Extended Ecological Footprint Model: A Case Study in Xi’an, China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, September.
    15. Kubiszewski, Ida & Costanza, Robert & Franco, Carol & Lawn, Philip & Talberth, John & Jackson, Tim & Aylmer, Camille, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 57-68.
    16. Warren-Rhodes, Kimberley & Koenig, Albert, 2001. "Ecosystem appropriation by Hong Kong and its implications for sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 347-359, December.
    17. Xiaowei Yao & Zhanqi Wang & Hongwei Zhang, 2016. "Dynamic Changes of the Ecological Footprint and Its Component Analysis Response to Land Use in Wuhan, China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(4), pages 1-14, April.
    18. Debrupa Chakraborty & Joyashree Roy, 2015. "Ecological footprint of paperboard and paper production unit in India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 909-921, August.
    19. York, Richard & Rosa, Eugene A. & Dietz, Thomas, 2003. "STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 351-365, October.
    20. Lilian Albornoz Mendoza & Rafael Ortiz Pech & Rodolfo Canto Sáenz, 2020. "La insostenibilidad del desarrollo en las entidades federativas de México. (The Unsustainability of the Development in Mexican States)," Ensayos Revista de Economia, Universidad Autonoma de Nuevo Leon, Facultad de Economia, vol. 0(1), pages 59-86, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eko:ekoeko:8_88. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marta Höffner (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.