Reply to the first systematic response by the Global Footprint Network to criticism: A real debate finally?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

15 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abstract We respond to a reaction of the Global Footprint Network/GFN on our 8-point criticism of the ecological footprint. We also refer to, and comment on, an associated debate in this journal between Giampietro and Saltelli (2014a, 2014b), on the one hand, and Goldfinger et al. (2014), on the other. We conclude that criticism on the footprint is accumulating and coherent across the various studies and disciplines and among the different authors. This was the first time that Wackernagel/GFN systematically responded to our criticisms. Hence, our response contains several original elements and the resulting exchange can be seen to add value to the existing literature. It ultimately allows readers to better make up their mind about the different viewpoints on the ecological footprint.
Original languageEnglish
Article number2425
Pages (from-to)458-463
JournalEcological Indicators
Volume58
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2015

Keywords

  • Aggregate environmental indicator
  • Carbon dioxide emissions
  • Ecological footprint
  • Energy use
  • International trade
  • Land use

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to the first systematic response by the Global Footprint Network to criticism: A real debate finally?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this