Sustainable Cities and Communities

Living Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, Tony Wall

Urban Ecological Footprints

  • Claudia Y. Ortega-MontoyaEmail author
  • Arpan Johari
Living reference work entry



Urban ecological footprint is an area-based measure designed to account for the burden a given metropolis’ lifestyle has on the biosphere. It identifies, using a common measurement unit called global hectare, the amount of land area and aquatic resources required with the prevailing technology to continuously sustain a given population. This result includes the energy and material inputs needed to afford its demands and to process or dispose of wastes.


From its conception in the 1990s, the ecological footprint has been an important research field that resides in the evaluation of urban settlements to bring insights into urban sustainability. Its major strength is the direct measure of the natural capital (resources and ecological services) required to fulfill the consumption and processing rates of a given population and its relationship with economic development. The integration of this information...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Baabou W, Grunewald N, Ouellet-Plamondon C et al (2017) The ecological footprint of Mediterranean cities: awareness creation and policy implications. Environ Sci Pol 69:94–104. Scholar
  2. Bond S (2002) Ecological footprints. A guide for local authorities. WWF-UK, SurreyGoogle Scholar
  3. Borucke M, Moore D, Cranston G et al (2013) Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere’s regenerative capacity: The National Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecol Indic 24:518–533. Scholar
  4. Calcott A, Bull J (2008) Ecological footprint of British city residents. In: WWF. Accessed 20 Jul 2018
  5. Céspedes J, Morales-Pinzón T (2018) Urban metabolism and sustainability: precedents, genesis and research perspectives. Resour Conserv Recycl 131:216–224. Scholar
  6. Costanza R (2000) The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept. Ecol Econ 32:341–345. Scholar
  7. Daly HE (1990) Toward some operational principles of sustainable development. Ecol Econ 2:1–6. Scholar
  8. Ewing B, Goldfinger S, Wackernagel M et al (2008) The ecological footprint atlas 2008. Global Footprint Network, OaklandGoogle Scholar
  9. Ewing BR, Hawkins TR, Wiedmann TO et al (2012) Integrating ecological and water footprint accounting in a multi-regional input–output framework. Ecol Indic 23:1–8. Scholar
  10. Fang K, Heijungs R, de Snoo GR (2014) Theoretical exploration for the combination of the ecological, energy, carbon, and water footprints: overview of a footprint family. Ecol Indic 36:508–518. Scholar
  11. FAO (2017) FAOSTAT. In: Food Agric Organ United Nations. Accessed 4 Jun 2018
  12. FAO; GAEZ (2018) GAEZ – Global Agro-Ecological Zones. In: Food Agric Organ United Nations. International Institutes of Applied Systems Analysis. Accessed 4 Jun 2018
  13. Fiala N (2008) Measuring sustainability: why the ecological footprint is bad economics and bad environmental science. Ecol Econ 67:519–525. Scholar
  14. Figge L, Oebels K, Offermans A (2017) The effects of globalization on ecological footprints: an empirical analysis. Environ Dev Sustain 19:863–876CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Galli A, Giampietro M, Goldfinger S et al (2016) Questioning the ecological footprint. Ecol Indic 69:224–232. Scholar
  16. Haberl H, Wackernagel M, Krausmann F et al (2004) Ecological footprints and human appropriation of net primary production: a comparison. Land Use Policy 21:279–288. Scholar
  17. Hoekstra AY (ed) (2003) Virtual water trade. In: Proceedings of the international expert meeting on virtual water trade. IHE, Delft, 242pGoogle Scholar
  18. Holden E (2004) Ecological footprints and sustainable urban form. J Housing Built Environ 19:91–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Høyer KG, Holden E (2003) Household consumption and ecological footprints in Norway – does urban form matter? J Consum Policy 26:327–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kissinger M, Haim A (2008) Urban hinterlands – the case of an Israeli town ecological footprint. Environ Dev Sustain 10:391–405. Scholar
  21. Kissinger M, Rees WE (2009) Footprints on the prairies: Degradation and sustainability of Canadian agricultural land in a globalizing world. Ecological Economics 68(8–9):2309–2315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kool R (2013) Limits to growth, environmental science and the nature of modern prophecy. Ecol Econ 85:1–5. Scholar
  23. Korotayev A (2006) The World System urbanization dynamics. In: Turchin P, Grinin L, Korotayev A, de Munck V (eds) History & mathematics: historical dynamics and development of complex societies. KomKniga, Moscow, pp 44–62Google Scholar
  24. Lu Y, Chen B (2017) Urban ecological footprint prediction based on the Markov chain. J Clean Prod 163:146–153. Scholar
  25. Luck MA, Jenerette GD, Wu J, Grimm NB (2001) The urban funnel model and the spatially heterogeneous ecological footprint. Ecosystems 4:782–796. Scholar
  26. Mancini MS, Galli A, Coscieme L et al (2018) Exploring ecosystem services assessment through Ecological Footprint accounting. Ecosyst Serv 30:228–235. Scholar
  27. Meyer A (2000). Contraction & convergence: the global solution to climate change. Green Books, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  28. Moffatt I (2000) Ecological footprints and sustainable development. Ecol Econ 32:359–362. Scholar
  29. Moore D, Cranston G, Reed A, Galli A (2012) Projecting future human demand on the Earth’s regenerative capacity. Ecol Indic 16:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Neelmani J, Sudeshna S (2014) Urbanization in India: an impact assessment. Int J Appl Sociol 4:60–65. Scholar
  31. NFA (2018) National footprint accounts data set (1961–2014). In: Global footprint network – advancing the science of sustainability. Accessed 25 Oct 2019Google Scholar
  32. Nijkamp P, Rossi E, Vindigni G (2004) Ecological Footprints in plural: a meta-analytic comparison of empirical results. Reg Stud 38:747–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rees WE (1992) Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ Urban 4:121–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rees WE (1997) Is “sustainable city” an oxymoron? Local Environ 2:303–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rees W (2003) 1 – Ecological footprints and urban transportation. In: Tolley R (ed) Sustainable transport: Planning for walking and cycling in urban environments, 3–19. CRC Press/Woodhead: Boca Raton/Cambridge CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rees WE (2006) Ecological Footprints and Biocapacity: Essential Elements in Sustainability Assessment. In: Dewulf J, Van Langenhove H (eds) Renewables-based Technology. John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, pp. 143–157Google Scholar
  37. Rees WE, Rees WE (1995) Achieving sustainability: reform or transformation? J Plan Lit 9:343–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Roth E, Rosenthal H, Burbridge P (2000) A discussion of the use of the sustainability index: “Ecological footprint” for aquaculture production. Aquat Living Resour 13:461–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sun J, Liu C, Luo B (2009) In: Li D, Zhao C (eds) Calculation of resources carrying capacitybased on ecological footprint in Beijing mountainous area BT – computer and computing technologies in agriculture II, vol 1. Springer, Boston, pp 593–602Google Scholar
  40. Toledo VM (2013) El metabolismo social: una nueva teoría socioecológica. Relac Estud Hist y Soc XXXIV:41–71Google Scholar
  41. Toth G, Szigeti C (2016) The historical ecological footprint: from over-population to over-consumption. Ecol Indic 60:283–291. Scholar
  42. UNESCAPE (2013) Urbanization trends in Asia and the Pacific. In: United nations economic and social commission for Asia and the Pacific. Accessed 20 Jul 2018
  43. van den Bergh JCJM, Verbruggen H (1999) Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ecological footprint. Ecol Econ 29:61–72. Scholar
  44. Varshney A (1993) Beyond urban bias. Frank Cass, LondonGoogle Scholar
  45. Wackernagel M (2006) Ecological footprint accounting. In: Keiner M (ed) Comparing Earth’s biological capacity with an economy’s resource demand BT – the future of sustainability. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 193–209Google Scholar
  46. Wackernagel M, Monfreda C (2004) Ecological footprints and energy. In: Cleveland CJBT-E of E. Elsevier, New York, pp 1–11Google Scholar
  47. Wackernagel M, Rees WE (1996) Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth. no. 9:125Google Scholar
  48. Wackernagel M, Silverstein J (2000) Big things first: focusing on the scale imperative with the ecological footprint. Ecol Econ 32:391–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wackernagel M, Schulz NB, Deumling D et al (2002) Tracking the ecological overshoot of the human economy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 99:9266–9271. Scholar
  50. Wiedmann T, Minx J, Barrett J, Wackernagel M (2006) Allocating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with input–output analysis. Ecol Econ 56:28–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. WWF (2016) Living Planet Report 2016. Risk and resilience in a new era, GlandGoogle Scholar
  52. Yue D, Guo J, Hui C (2013) Scale dependency of biocapacity and the fallacy of unsustainable development. J Environ Manag 126:13–19. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Humanities and EducationTecnologico de MonterreyTorreonMexico
  2. 2.Principal Architect, AW Design, Architecture and UrbanismAhmedabadIndia

Section editors and affiliations

  • Hari Srinivas
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Policy StudiesKwansei Gakuin UniversityKobeJapan