Ecological Footprint: How Much Nature Do We Have Left?

My personal environmental impact depends on more than just the amount of gasoline I use, how many plastic straws I throw away, or whether or not I have reusable utensils at the ready every time I go out to eat. Here in the United States, there are so many more resources that support my everyday existence: the produce that travels across the country to end up on my plate, the energy powering my dorm building, and even the materials that building was made out of in the first place. 

It doesn’t just stop at the individual level, either. Both personal and institutional responsibility are at play here; businesses, governments, and the like have their own environmental impacts to consider. As the list of unsustainable practices gets longer and longer, it can seem daunting to keep track of it all. 

But in order to create a sustainable future, one with minimum waste and maximum human wellbeing, we need a way to account for how much of the environment we’re using (and reusing), and how much is left over.

The Ecological Footprint is one such method, and for my next few articles, I’m going to learn about the different applications of Ecological Footprint accounting. Here’s an overview of the method.

Isn’t it the same thing as a “carbon footprint”?

The Ecological Footprint is concerned with a lot more than just carbon dioxide. While the carbon footprint is an indicator of how much CO₂ a country, institution, or individual uses, the Ecological Footprint is concerned with biocapacity: the land and other ecological resources available to a specific country, individual, or other entity. This land is used to both produce beneficial resources and sequester harmful ones, including CO₂. Carbon footprints are incorporated into an Ecological Footprint, but they’re one metric of many. 

This means that the Ecological Footprint is concerned with much more than just how much we contribute to climate change. The land we grow crops on, the water we use for drinking and irrigation, the amount of fish we harvest in a year—all of these resources have their limits, and if we exceed them we risk being unable to support our communities. 

The goal isn’t to stop using these resources entirely; rather, it’s to use them efficiently, and only at a pace that allows nature to replenish them in full. 

What does the Ecological Footprint metric do?

In essence, the Ecological Footprint applies basic economic principles to nature. According to the Global Footprint Network, it calculates a population’s “demand” on the environment by how much land and resources are needed for it to consume all of the goods it uses (and dispose of them afterward). This includes the land used for farming, logging, and living, as well as areas used to pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere, such as forests. 

This “demand” is a population’s Ecological Footprint, while its “supply” is its biocapacity. When demand is greater than supply, the population is in overshoot—the environment can’t provide enough resources, or replenish them fast enough, to support the population. If supply is greater than demand, the population has a reserve of extra resources.

I’m excited to spend time digging deeper into this concept because of how holistic and widely applicable the Ecological Footprint is. Both individuals and entire countries can use it to shape policy and personal decisions, and it addresses both climate change and sustainable living at once. 

In 2017, the world had an Ecological Footprint of 1.7 Earths—meaning that, on average, our current way of life uses up more resources than our one planet can produce or replenish in a year. It’s our responsibility to change that, and ensure that humanity can live sustainably for generations to come. 

For my next article, I’m learning more about individual Ecological Footprints. Based on my lifestyle, my personal footprint is 2.1 Earths. If you want to get ahead, take this Ecological Footprint quiz and learn more about your own individual footprint!

• Author
• Recent Posts

Emma Fagan

Hey! I’m Emma, and I’m the Environment and Sustainability Editor here at Novel Hand. I’m a senior at Vanderbilt University, majoring in Earth and Environmental Sciences and Political Science. My work focuses on the intersection between environmental concerns and humanitarian issues such as justice, health, and poverty. When I’m not studying in a coffee shop somewhere, you’ll find me reading, running, climbing a rock wall, or listening to every genre of music under the sun. If you have questions, ideas, or just want to chat, feel free to contact me at emma.fagan@vanderbilt.edu!

Latest posts by Emma Fagan (see all)

• A Dose of Climate Optimism from 2021 - January 20, 2022
• When It Comes To Climate Change, Language Matters. Here’s Why. - December 28, 2021
• The EPA Wants To Take A Few Years To Regulate PFAS. Here’s Why. - October 28, 2021