efa, a critical review based on sutcliffe et. al (2008)
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/8/2019 EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
1/5
Guillermo Umaa
Macquarie University
October, 2010
EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
Sutcliffe, M., Hooper, P. and Howell, R. (2008) Can Eco-Footprinting Analysis Be Used
Successfully to Encourage More Sustainable Behaviour at the Household Level? Sustainable
Development16: 1-16.
The technique of Ecological Footprint Analysis (EFA) has been widely used to understand global
and national ecological impacts, but its use for individual households has not been extensively
spread. The study by Sutcliffe et al. (2008) Can Eco-Footprinting Analysis Be Used Successfully to
Encourage More Sustainable Behaviour at the Household Level? talks about the possibility of
using this tool to create conscience about ecological impacts and engage people into changing
their individual behaviours. The proposal of this study is that current global lack of sustainability
should be linked to personal lifestyles. Changes have to be done in a bottom-up approach because
there is a lack of political will to reduce national ecological footprints in most countries.
A summary of the Study:
EFA is based on the assumption that to live sustainably humans must use natures renewable
products and services no more quickly than they are replaced, and produce waste no more quickly
than nature can absorb it (Sutcliffe et al. 2008: 2). According to the Global Footprint Network
-
8/8/2019 EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
2/5
(2010), it calculates how much biologically productive area is required to produce the resources
for the human population and to absorb its waste. EFA measures transport use, energy
consumption, waste production, food consumption and built land.
Sutcliff (et al. 2008) argue that the worlds available bioproductive area is 1.8 hectares per capita,
but the worlds footprint is now greater than 2.2 hectares per person. The question is: Do people
change their behaviour towards less resource intensive life styles when knowing these facts or do
people need other incentives to change their lifestyles?
The study was divided into four questionnaires that measured environmental awareness and
attitudes, individual environmental footprint and reactions towards changing personal behaviour
in the short-term. It was designed for 18 households in the UK and relied on the honesty of the
participants through all the study.
The experiment threw positive results. All the households made an effort to reduce their impact in
th
e sh
ort-term after knowing th
e environmental impacts of th
eir personal life styles, but th
e study
does not lead to a precise conclusion on if EFA is always as effective as this small sample shows.
According to Sutcliffe et al (2008:14) The question remains as to whether people can be
persuaded to reduce their eco-footprints to [a lower] level.
Is EFA effective on its own or are other incentive are needed?
The truth is that people always need to be moved by a personal benefit to change their lifestyles.
It would be too hopeful to think that the subjects in the study changed their behaviours only by
seeing their EFA results. If that was the case, household consumption around the world would be
much less than it is now. Nowadays everyone has been exposed to figures and facts about their
-
8/8/2019 EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
3/5
personal environmental impact, either on the media or in an academic environment. Sadly, most
peoples actions do not change much.
If individual households see a positive cost-benefit aspect after going through an EFA they will
definitely change their attitude towards consumption. The Best Foot Forward organisation
provides EFA for companies and it is effective because it provides cost-benefit analysis and
business strategies that would reduce environmental impacts and at the same time give
productivity to the company (Best Foot Forward 2010), the same could be done on households.
There are many examples of peoples everyday life when some sort of environmental footprint
analysis has been made but it has not had the impact that it is supposed to. Many High school and
university environmental programmes have activities that are designed to create awareness of
students ecological footprint, but they hardly change behaviours. Everyone has, at some point in
their life, been surveyed for some EFA study. In these surveys many people give answers that do
not reflect th
e real impact.Th
e acknowledgment of our wrong beh
aviour does not ch
ange our
ways of consuming or producing wastes. This is why the fact that Sutcliffe (et al.) study relies on
the answers of such a small sample does not lead to very good conclusions about the effectiveness
in making people aware of their impact.
The value of the Ecological Footprint Analysis:
But EFA must not be discarded. It is much more accurate than other sustainability measures
because it takes into account almost every aspect of a lifestyle. It is true that the EFA facilitates
discussions and decision-making processes by providing a solid knowledge base and an easily
applicable calculation method (Stoeglehner & Narodoslawsky 2008). The bottom-up approach, as
-
8/8/2019 EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
4/5
Sutcliffe (et al. 2008) propose it, could be combined with a well structured top-down approach. If
people become aware of their personal impacts, their pressure on politics would be stronger
towards more sustainable policies.
According to the NSW government, in a survey made in 2009 only 78% of people in the state were
concerned about environmental problems, compared to 87% in 2006. This is a real life example of
how awareness per se is not the answer to change environmental behavior; people continuously
start and stop doing sustainable activities. A cost-benefit pressure would make changes steadier.
The study by Sutcliffe (et al. 2008) takes into account opinions by a great variety of authors and
does not aim to get to a single conclusion but to open doors for new ideas and discussions.
Although the sample used might have been influenced by the pressure of being part of a study and
honesty in the study is debatable, the overall study is an inspiration to involve common people
into effective ways of dealing with environmental damage. The text is written in a way that shows
every important part of the experiment and relates the issue with other studies. It also shows
relevant graphics. The article ends by stating that further investigation should be made and leaves
space for furth
er debate, wh
ich
is crucial wh
en relating science and politics.
The conclusion is that a bottom-up approach should be encouraged, giving people the opportunity
to benefit from their behavioral change. A global change in production, consumption, population
control and ecosystem protection (WWF 2002) would be a good combination with the bottom-up
approach. A form of politics that is highly influenced by civilians that are aware of their own
footprint is desirable. Individuals should start living more sustainable lives before governments
approve any sort of environmental policies, as Sutcliffe (et al.2008) suggest as a concluding
argument.
-
8/8/2019 EFA, a Critical Review based on Sutcliffe et. Al (2008)
5/5
References
y Best Foot Forward Organization. (2010). Products and Services, BFF, viewed 29 September,2010, http://www.bestfootforward.com/personalstepwise.html
y Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW Government. (2010). Whocares about the environment in 2009? At a Glance, viewed 10 October, 2010,
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/community/201057_WhoCares09Glance.
pdf
y Global Footprint Network. (2010). Footprint Calculator Frequent Asked Questions, GFN,viewed 29 September, 2010,
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/footprint_calculator_frequent
ly_asked_questions/
y Stoeglehner, Gernot., Narodoslawsky, Michael .(2008). Implementing ecologicalfootprinting in decision-making processes. Land Use Policy, Science Direct. Volume 25,
Issue 3 Pages 421-431
y Sutcliffe, M., Hooper, P. and Howell, R. (2008). Can Eco-Footprinting Analysis Be UsedSuccessfully to Encourage More Sustainable Behaviour at the Household Level?
Sustainable Development16: 1-16.
y WWF Website. (2002). Living Planet Report 2002, WWF, viewed 10 October, 2010,http://assets.panda.org/downloads/lpr2002.pdf [29 September 2010].