The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018
Open accessAbstract
Ecological Footprint accounting quantifies the supply and demand of Earth’s biocapacity. The National Footprint Accounts (NFA) are the most widely used Ecological Footprint (EF) dataset, and provide results for most countries and the world from 1961 to 2014, based primarily on publicly available UN datasets. Here, we review the evolution of the NFA, describe and quantify the effects of improvements that have been implemented into the accounts since the 2012 edition, and review the latest global trends. Comparing results over six editions of NFAs, we find that time-series trends in world results remain stable, and that the world Ecological Footprint for the latest common year (2008) has increased six percent after four major accounting improvements and more than thirty minor improvements. The latest results from the NFA 2018 Edition for the year 2014 indicate that humanity’s Ecological Footprint is 1.7 Earths, and that global ecological overshoot continues to grow. While improved management practices and increased agricultural yields have assisted in a steady increase of Earth’s biocapacity since 1961, humanity’s Ecological Footprint continues to increase at a faster pace than global biocapacity, particularly in Asia, where the total and per capita Ecological Footprint are increasing faster than all other regions.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J., Cornell, S. E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E. M., Biggs, R., Carpenter, S. R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C. A., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1259855 · Cited by 12,527
Global Biodiversity: Indicators of Recent Declines
Butchart, S. H. M., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Almond, R. E. A., Baillie, J. E. M., Bomhard, B., Brown, C., Bruno, J., et al. (2010) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1187512 · Cited by 4,892
Self-citationOur common future ; by world commission on environment and development
Brundtland, G. H., Khalid, M., Agnelli, S., Al-Athel, S. A., Chidzero, B. T. G., Fadika, L. M., Hauff, Lang, I., Ma, S., de Botero, M. M., et al. (1987) · Cited by 2,497
Venter, O., Sanderson, E. W., Magrach, A., Allan, J. R., Beher, J., Jones, K. R., Possingham, H. P., Laurance, W. F., Wood, P., Fekete, B. M., et al. (2016) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms12558 · Cited by 1,887
Toward some operational principles of sustainable development
Daly, H. E. (1990) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/0921-8009(90)90010-r · Cited by 1,369
Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy
Wackernagel, M., Schulz, N. B., Deumling, D., Linares, A. C., Jenkins, M., Kapos, V., Monfreda, C., Loh, J., Myers, N., Norgaard, R., et al. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.142033699 · Cited by 1,265
Self-citationNational natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept
Wackernagel, M., Onisto, L., Bello, P., Callejas Linares, A., Susana López Falfán, I., Méndez Garcı́a, J., Isabel Suárez Guerrero, A., & Guadalupe Suárez Guerrero, M. (1999) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(98)90063-5 · Cited by 1,132
Self-citationThe Global Food‐Energy‐Water Nexus
D'Odorico, P., Davis, K. F., Rosa, L., Carr, J. A., Chiarelli, D., Dell'Angelo, J., Gephart, J., MacDonald, G. K., Seekell, D. A., Suweis, S., et al. (2018) · Reviews of Geophysics · doi:10.1029/2017rg000591 · Cited by 796
A Systemic Framework for Sustainability Assessment
Sala, S., Ciuffo, B., & Nijkamp, P. (2015) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.09.015 · Cited by 743
Borucke, M., Moore, D., Cranston, G., Gracey, K., Iha, K., Larson, J., Lazarus, E., Morales, J. C., Wackernagel, M., & Galli, A. (2013) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.08.005 · Cited by 699
Self-citation
Cited by
Ilkay, S. C., Yilanci, V., Ulucak, R., & Jones, K. (2021) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113033 · Cited by 71
Evaluating The Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: within and beyond The SDGs
Dickens, C., McCartney, M., Tickner, D., Harrison, I. J., Pacheco, P., & Ndhlovu, B. (2020) · doi:10.20944/preprints202008.0185.v1 · Cited by 66
Evaluating the Global State of Ecosystems and Natural Resources: Within and Beyond the SDGs
Dickens, C., McCartney, M., Tickner, D., Harrison, I. J., Pacheco, P., & Ndhlovu, B. (2020) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su12187381 · Cited by 65
da Costa, V. B. F., Bitencourt, L., Dias, B. H., Soares, T., de Andrade, J. V. B., & Bonatto, B. D. (2025) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2024.114988 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Lin, D., Hanscom, L., Murthy, A., Galli, A., Evans, M., Neill, E., Mancini, M. S., Martindill, J., Medouar, F.-Z., Huang, S., & Wackernagel, M.
- Venue
- Resources
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2018-09-17
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 58
- ISSN
- 2079-9276 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2891411478
- Cited by
- 398
- References
- 43
- FWCI
- 60.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3390/resources7030058
- The paper
- Lin, D., Hanscom, L., Murthy, A., Galli, A., Evans, M., Neill, E., Mancini, M. S., Martindill, J., Medouar, F.-Z., Huang, S., & Wackernagel, M. (2018). Ecological Footprint Accounting for Countries: Updates and Results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018. Resources. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources7030058
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
