Indicator and indicandum: “Sustainable way” vs “prevailing conditions” in the Ecological Footprint

This paper investigates the coherence of the relationship between indicandum (the subject to be indicated) and indicator (how the subject is effectively indicated) in the framework of the Ecological Footprint (EF). In this case, the indicandum is potential overuse of regenerative capacity measured b...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inEcological indicators Vol. 16; pp. 47 - 50
Main Authors Bastianoni, S., Niccolucci, V., Pulselli, R.M., Marchettini, N.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Elsevier Ltd 01.05.2012
Subjects
Biocapacity
carbon dioxide
cropland
Ecological Footprint
fishery resources
Indicandum
Indicator
resource management
Sustainability
wastes
Indicandum
Ecological Footprint
Biocapacity
Sustainability
Indicator
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:This paper investigates the coherence of the relationship between indicandum (the subject to be indicated) and indicator (how the subject is effectively indicated) in the framework of the Ecological Footprint (EF). In this case, the indicandum is potential overuse of regenerative capacity measured by the indicator EF. According to the latest definition, EF measures the area of biologically productive land and water required to produce all the resources consumed and to absorb the waste (in particular the carbon dioxide) generated, considering prevailing technology and resource management practices. The term “prevailing technology” replaces “sustainable way” in the definition. This creates confusion and prevents the indicator from fully representing the indicandum. A correction factor in the classical EF formulation is proposed to restore coherence of the indicandum–indicator relationship. The correction factor is particularly relevant for cropland and fishing grounds.
Bibliography:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.10.001
ISSN:1470-160X
1872-7034
DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.10.001