Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 17, Issue 4, pp 909–921 | Cite as

Ecological footprint of paperboard and paper production unit in India

  • Debrupa ChakrabortyEmail author
  • Joyashree Roy
Case Study


It is important to evaluate the performance of industries in a growing economy like India through responsible resource use assessments. The article estimates ecological footprint (EF) to communicate the environmental effects of a paperboard and paper production unit in India based on information collected through face-to-face interview method. EF has been calculated by adopting component or bottom-up approach taking into consideration all the components of EF (land, energy, freight and employees transport, water, materials and wastes). Results show that the total EF for production and allied activities of the case study unit varies between 5,62,845 and 2,15,564 ha and EF per tonne of production varying between 23.61 and 9.03 ha. This is based on the production of 23,828 Mt of output of specialty and tissues paper, and the variation occurs due to higher and lower conversion factor for materials and water. The hotspots of EF are energy, materials and wastes.


Ecological footprint Paper production India 



We thankfully acknowledge University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi, India, for funding this work under Project Reference F. PHW-048/10-11 (ERO) dated 21.10.2010. We also acknowledge with thanks the anonymous referees for their encouraging and valuable observations on the earlier versions of the paper. The support rendered by Ms. Shyamasree Dasgupta, Research Scholar, Dept. of Economics, Jadavpur University is also highly appreciated.

Supplementary material

10668_2014_9563_MOESM1_ESM.rtf (250 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (rtf 250 kb)


  1. Arabindo, P. (2006). Neighbourhood transformations in Peri-Urban Chennai. In V. Dupont, & N. Sridharan (Eds.), Peri urban dynamics: Case studies in Chennai, Hyderabad and Mumbai. CSH occasional paper no. 17, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  2. Barret, J., & Scott, A. (2001). The ecological footprint: A metric for corporate sustainability. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 8, 316–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrett, J., Vallack, H., Jones, A., & Haq, G. (2002). A material flow analysis and ecological footprint of York. Stockholm: Stockholm Environment Institute.Google Scholar
  4. BFF. (2002). City limits: A resource flow and ecological footprint analysis of greater London. Biffaward programme on sustainable resource use. Best Foot Forward,
  5. Burte, H., & Krishnankutty, M. (2006). On the edge: Planning, describing and imagining the sea side edge of Mumbai. In V. DuPont, & N. Sridharan (Eds.), Peri Urban dynamics: Case studies in Chennai, Hyderabad and Mumbai. CSH occasional paper No.17, New Delhi.Google Scholar
  6. Chambers, N., Simmons, C., & Wackernagel, M. (2000). Sharing nature’s interest: Ecological footprints as an indicator of sustainability. U.K.: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  7. Chen, B., Chen, G. Q., Yang, Z. F., & Jiang, M. M. (2007). Ecological footprint accounting for energy and resources in China. Energy Policy, 35, 1599–1609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cole, V., & Sinclaier, J. A. (2002). Measuring the ecological footprint of a himalayan tourist center. Mountain Research and Development, 22(2), 132–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ewing, B., Reed, A., Galli, A., Kitzes, J., & Wackernagel, M. (2010). Calculation methodology for the national footprint accounts. Oakland: Global Footprint Network.Google Scholar
  10. Hanafiah, M. M., Hendriks, A. J., & Huijbregts, M. A. J. (2012). Comparing the ecological footprint with the biodiversity footprint of products. Journal of Cleaner Production, 37, 107–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hanafiah, M. M., Huijbregts, M., & Hendriks, J. (2010). The influence of nutrients and non-CO2 greenhouse gas emissions on the ecological footprint of products. Sustainability, 2, 963–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huijbregts, M. A. J., Hellweg, S., Frischknecht, R., Hungerbuhler, K., & Hendriks, A. J. (2008). Ecological footprint accounting in the life cycle assessment of products. Ecological Economics, 64, 798–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kissinger, M., Fix, J., & Rees, W. E. (2007). Wood and non-wood pulp production: a comparative eco-footprint analysis of alternative paper-pulp manufacturing on the Canadian prairies. Ecological Economics, 62, 552–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kulkarni, H. D., (2013). Pulp and paper industry raw material scenario-ITC plantation a case study. IIPTA, 25(1), 79–90.Google Scholar
  15. Lenzen, M. (2003). Environmentally important paths, linkages and key sectors in the Australian economy. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 14(1), 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lenzen, M., Murray, S., & Shama, A. (2001). A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecological Economics, 37, 229–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li, G. J., Wang, GU, X. W., Liu, J. X., Ding, Y., & Liang, G. Y. (2008). Application of the componential method for ecological footprint calculation of a Chinese university campus. Ecological Indicators, 8, 75–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lyndhurst, B. (2003). London’s ecological footprint: A review. London: GLA Economics.Google Scholar
  19. Mc Loone, A., Yvonne, R., Bernadette, O. R., & Richard, M. (2008). An environmental performance assessment and ecological footprint analysis of SMEs in the MidWest Region. Paper presented at the CRCC conference 2008, Queens University, Belfast.Google Scholar
  20. McDonald, G., Patterson, W., & Murray, G. (2004). Ecological footprints and interdependencies of New Zealand regions. Ecological Economics, 50, 49–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Munshi, T. (2007). Urban form and the ecological footprint of Transport-A case of Ahmedabad City, India. Project prepared and is to be conducted by International Institute for Geo-information Science and Earth Observation (ITC), Enschede, the Netherlands and CEPT University, Ahmadabad, India.Google Scholar
  22. Simmons, C., & Chambers, N. (1998). Footprinting U.K. households: How big is your ecological garden? Local Environment, 3(3), 3655–3662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Simmons, C., Lewis, K., & Barrett, J. (2000). Two Feet-two approaches: A component-based model of ecological footprinting. Ecological Economics, 32, 375–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sonak, S. (2004). Ecological footprint of production: A tool to assess environmental impacts of tourism activity. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 15(2), 2–12.Google Scholar
  25. Thattai, D. V., Muralidharan, R., & Karthick, A. (2007). Ecological footprint calculation for a college campus in Southern India. ESA/SER joint meeting, San Jose McEnergy Convention Centre, San Jose, CA.Google Scholar
  26. Wackernagel, M., Monfreda, C., Erbb, K. H., Haberlb, H., & Schulzb, N. B. (2004). Ecological footprint time series of Austria, the Philippines, and South Korea for 1961–1999: Comparing the conventional approach to an ‘actual land area’ approach. Land Use Policy, 21, 261–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wackernagel, M., OnistoL, Bello P., Linares, A. C., Falfan, I. S. L., Garcia, J. M., Guerrero, A. I. S., et al. (1999). National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecological Economics, 29, 375–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. E. (1996). Our ecological footprint. Reducing human impact on the earth. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, BC.Google Scholar
  29. Weidmann, T., & Barrett, J. (2010). A review of the ecological footprint indicator—Perceptions and methods. Sustainability, 2, 1645–1693. doi: 10.3390/su2061645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CommerceNetaji Nagar CollegeKolkataIndia
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsJadavpur UniversityKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations