The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth
Open accessAbstract
Review: Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the Earth. By Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees Reviewed by Gene Bazan Center for Sustainability, Pennsylvania State University Wackernagel, Mathis and William Rees. Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the Earth. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers, 1996. 160 pp. US $14.94 paper ISBN: 0-86571-312-X. Partially recycled, acid-free paper using soy-based ink. If the earth's inhabitants were to live at the standard of the U.S., we would require three planet Earths to support us. Many of us have heard or read something like this before. Our Ecological Footprint provides a graphically compelling and quantitatively rigorous way for us to engage in the worldwide sustainability debate: Ecological Footprint analysis. Through this analysis we can determine the consequences of our behavior, and proposed solutions, at any level: individual, household, community, nation, or world. Ecological Footprint analysis measures the aggregate land area required for a given population to exist in a sustainable manner. Wackernagel and Rees note that at 11 acres per person, the U.S. has the highest per capita footprint and suggest that this number should be closer to 6 acres per person. Further, the U.S. faces an 80% ecological deficit, which means we are borrowing from our grandchildren's legacy, and expropriating land from elsewhere in the world. By contrast, each European requires around 5 acres; however, Europeans face higher ecological deficits because they have smaller land areas. Unlike other approaches, which focus on the depletion of non-renewables such as fossil fuel and minerals, Ecological Footprint analysis asserts that the road to sustainability must be paved with sustainable practices. Thus, our use of fossil fuel must have as a compensatory sink the acres of woodlot required to sequester the carbon from our combustion of fossil fuel (in our cars, home heating, etc.) or, alternatively, the acres of fields required to grow biofuel. For example, in comparing our daily commute by car, bus or bicycle, and considering all land requirements (e.g., manufacturing land to produce
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
Cited by
STIRPAT, IPAT and ImPACT: analytic tools for unpacking the driving forces of environmental impacts
York, R., Rosa, E. A., & Dietz, T. (2003) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/s0921-8009(03)00188-5 · Cited by 2,388
An overview of sustainability assessment methodologies
Singh, R. K., Murty, H. R., Gupta, S. K., & Dikshit, A. K. (2009) · Ecological Indicators · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.05.011 · Cited by 2,069
Hickel, J., & Kallis, G. (2020) · New Political Economy · doi:10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964 · Cited by 2,007
Water footprints of nations: Water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern
Hoekstra, A. Y., & Chapagain, A. K. (2006) · Water Resources Management · doi:10.1007/s11269-006-9039-x · Cited by 1,458
Categorising tools for sustainability assessment
Ness, B., Urbel-Piirsalu, E., Anderberg, S., & Olsson, L. (2007) · Ecological Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2006.07.023 · Cited by 1,407
Metadata
- Authors
- Bazan, G.
- Venue
- Electronic Green Journal
- Publisher
- California Digital Library (CDL)
- Published
- 1997-11-01
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 7
- ISSN
- 1076-7975 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1551322995
- Cited by
- 4,654
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 375.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
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: Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5070/g31710273
- The paper
- Bazan, G. (1997). Our Ecological Footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. Electronic Green Journal. https://doi.org/10.5070/g31710273
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.