Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives
Recommendations regarding possible policies to be adopted in order to decrease Sieben Linden’s Ecological Footprint (EF) are hard to formulate as they may depend on the environmental metrics adopted: a carbon-only as well as a carbon-plus-energy analysis would indicate different weaknesses and stren...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Buchkapitel |
Sprache: | eng |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 96 |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 81 |
container_title | |
container_volume | |
creator | Bocco, Andrea Gerace, Martina Pollini, Susanna |
description | Recommendations regarding possible policies to be adopted in order to decrease Sieben Linden’s Ecological Footprint (EF) are hard to formulate as they may depend on the environmental metrics adopted: a carbon-only as well as a carbon-plus-energy analysis would indicate different weaknesses and strengths than an EF assessment. The main commonly recognised strengths of EF are: “its ability to condense the size of human pressure on different types of bioproductivity into one single value, the possibility to provide some sense of over-consumption, and the ability to communicate results to a wide audience”. In addition, the EF methodology does not account for the possibility of multiple functions of an ecosystem and this may result in a larger area of land being shown as required than actually necessary. The actual “public services” EF of Sieben Linden residents must be lower than the per capita share flatly applied in the EF calculation. |
doi_str_mv | 10.4324/9780429032349-6 |
format | Book Chapter |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_ebookcentralchapters_7244856_15_96</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>EBC5773180_15_96</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-i276t-f4cd7cc6eacb4ab872304b91be18d0b7757b69a9477d039c2fdf2c53e12c496b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1LAzEQhiOiqLVnr_0Brs3HJLM5SrFVKHjRc0iyWVy7u6nJWvHfu6VF8OZpPuB5GOYl5IbROxAc5hpLClxTwQXoQp2Q6XGjuNJMnB5moZCBVADn5IrRUlAGKNkFmeb8TinlDKVS_JLMl01v21kKnU2bfDs2PnZd6Cs7NLHPM9tXs21IeRv80OxCviZntW1zmB7rhLwuH14Wj8X6efW0uF8XDUc1FDX4Cr1XwXoH1pXIBQWnmQusrKhDlOiUthoQKyq053VVcy9FYNyDVk5MCD94tyl-fIY8mOBi3PjQD8m2_s1uh_EqgxyglMowabT6LyQRBSvpL7Q6QE1fx9TZr5jaygz2u42pTrb3Td5LsmHU7AMwfwIwyuxG5_grLn4A9JJ52g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Publisher</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>book_chapter</recordtype><pqid>EBC5773180_15_96</pqid></control><display><type>book_chapter</type><title>Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives</title><source>OAPEN</source><source>DOAB: Directory of Open Access Books</source><source>Taylor & Francis eBooks Open Access</source><creator>Bocco, Andrea ; Gerace, Martina ; Pollini, Susanna</creator><creatorcontrib>Bocco, Andrea ; Gerace, Martina ; Pollini, Susanna</creatorcontrib><description>Recommendations regarding possible policies to be adopted in order to decrease Sieben Linden’s Ecological Footprint (EF) are hard to formulate as they may depend on the environmental metrics adopted: a carbon-only as well as a carbon-plus-energy analysis would indicate different weaknesses and strengths than an EF assessment. The main commonly recognised strengths of EF are: “its ability to condense the size of human pressure on different types of bioproductivity into one single value, the possibility to provide some sense of over-consumption, and the ability to communicate results to a wide audience”. In addition, the EF methodology does not account for the possibility of multiple functions of an ecosystem and this may result in a larger area of land being shown as required than actually necessary. The actual “public services” EF of Sieben Linden residents must be lower than the per capita share flatly applied in the EF calculation.</description><edition>1</edition><identifier>ISBN: 9780367145644</identifier><identifier>ISBN: 0367145642</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9780429626913</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 0429626916</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9780429032349</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9780429628559</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 9780429625275</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 042903234X</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 0429628552</identifier><identifier>EISBN: 0429625278</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.4324/9780429032349-6</identifier><identifier>OCLC: 1083014751</identifier><identifier>OCLC: 1202538478</identifier><identifier>LCCallNum: HT169.575 .B633 2019</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United Kingdom: Routledge</publisher><ispartof>The Environmental Impact of Sieben Linden Ecovillage, 2019, p.81-96</ispartof><rights>2019 Andrea Bocco, Martina Gerace, Susanna Pollini</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0001-5639-5660</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Uhttps://ebookcentral.proquest.com/covers/5773180-l.jpg</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>777,778,782,791,27914</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bocco, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerace, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pollini, Susanna</creatorcontrib><title>Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives</title><title>The Environmental Impact of Sieben Linden Ecovillage</title><description>Recommendations regarding possible policies to be adopted in order to decrease Sieben Linden’s Ecological Footprint (EF) are hard to formulate as they may depend on the environmental metrics adopted: a carbon-only as well as a carbon-plus-energy analysis would indicate different weaknesses and strengths than an EF assessment. The main commonly recognised strengths of EF are: “its ability to condense the size of human pressure on different types of bioproductivity into one single value, the possibility to provide some sense of over-consumption, and the ability to communicate results to a wide audience”. In addition, the EF methodology does not account for the possibility of multiple functions of an ecosystem and this may result in a larger area of land being shown as required than actually necessary. The actual “public services” EF of Sieben Linden residents must be lower than the per capita share flatly applied in the EF calculation.</description><isbn>9780367145644</isbn><isbn>0367145642</isbn><isbn>9780429626913</isbn><isbn>0429626916</isbn><isbn>9780429032349</isbn><isbn>9780429628559</isbn><isbn>9780429625275</isbn><isbn>042903234X</isbn><isbn>0429628552</isbn><isbn>0429625278</isbn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>book_chapter</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>book_chapter</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkU1LAzEQhiOiqLVnr_0Brs3HJLM5SrFVKHjRc0iyWVy7u6nJWvHfu6VF8OZpPuB5GOYl5IbROxAc5hpLClxTwQXoQp2Q6XGjuNJMnB5moZCBVADn5IrRUlAGKNkFmeb8TinlDKVS_JLMl01v21kKnU2bfDs2PnZd6Cs7NLHPM9tXs21IeRv80OxCviZntW1zmB7rhLwuH14Wj8X6efW0uF8XDUc1FDX4Cr1XwXoH1pXIBQWnmQusrKhDlOiUthoQKyq053VVcy9FYNyDVk5MCD94tyl-fIY8mOBi3PjQD8m2_s1uh_EqgxyglMowabT6LyQRBSvpL7Q6QE1fx9TZr5jaygz2u42pTrb3Td5LsmHU7AMwfwIwyuxG5_grLn4A9JJ52g</recordid><startdate>2019</startdate><enddate>2019</enddate><creator>Bocco, Andrea</creator><creator>Gerace, Martina</creator><creator>Pollini, Susanna</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><scope>FFUUA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5639-5660</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>2019</creationdate><title>Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives</title><author>Bocco, Andrea ; Gerace, Martina ; Pollini, Susanna</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-i276t-f4cd7cc6eacb4ab872304b91be18d0b7757b69a9477d039c2fdf2c53e12c496b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>book_chapters</rsrctype><prefilter>book_chapters</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bocco, Andrea</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gerace, Martina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pollini, Susanna</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Ebook Central - Book Chapters - Demo use only</collection></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bocco, Andrea</au><au>Gerace, Martina</au><au>Pollini, Susanna</au><format>book</format><genre>bookitem</genre><ristype>CHAP</ristype><atitle>Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives</atitle><btitle>The Environmental Impact of Sieben Linden Ecovillage</btitle><date>2019</date><risdate>2019</risdate><spage>81</spage><epage>96</epage><pages>81-96</pages><isbn>9780367145644</isbn><isbn>0367145642</isbn><eisbn>9780429626913</eisbn><eisbn>0429626916</eisbn><eisbn>9780429032349</eisbn><eisbn>9780429628559</eisbn><eisbn>9780429625275</eisbn><eisbn>042903234X</eisbn><eisbn>0429628552</eisbn><eisbn>0429625278</eisbn><abstract>Recommendations regarding possible policies to be adopted in order to decrease Sieben Linden’s Ecological Footprint (EF) are hard to formulate as they may depend on the environmental metrics adopted: a carbon-only as well as a carbon-plus-energy analysis would indicate different weaknesses and strengths than an EF assessment. The main commonly recognised strengths of EF are: “its ability to condense the size of human pressure on different types of bioproductivity into one single value, the possibility to provide some sense of over-consumption, and the ability to communicate results to a wide audience”. In addition, the EF methodology does not account for the possibility of multiple functions of an ecosystem and this may result in a larger area of land being shown as required than actually necessary. The actual “public services” EF of Sieben Linden residents must be lower than the per capita share flatly applied in the EF calculation.</abstract><cop>United Kingdom</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.4324/9780429032349-6</doi><oclcid>1083014751</oclcid><oclcid>1202538478</oclcid><tpages>16</tpages><edition>1</edition><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5639-5660</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISBN: 9780367145644 |
ispartof | The Environmental Impact of Sieben Linden Ecovillage, 2019, p.81-96 |
issn | |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_ebookcentralchapters_7244856_15_96 |
source | OAPEN; DOAB: Directory of Open Access Books; Taylor & Francis eBooks Open Access |
title | Final remarks, recommendations and perspectives |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T09%3A10%3A39IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:book&rft.genre=bookitem&rft.atitle=Final%20remarks,%20recommendations%20and%20perspectives&rft.btitle=The%20Environmental%20Impact%20of%20Sieben%20Linden%20Ecovillage&rft.au=Bocco,%20Andrea&rft.date=2019&rft.spage=81&rft.epage=96&rft.pages=81-96&rft.isbn=9780367145644&rft.isbn_list=0367145642&rft_id=info:doi/10.4324/9780429032349-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3EEBC5773180_15_96%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft.eisbn=9780429626913&rft.eisbn_list=0429626916&rft.eisbn_list=9780429032349&rft.eisbn_list=9780429628559&rft.eisbn_list=9780429625275&rft.eisbn_list=042903234X&rft.eisbn_list=0429628552&rft.eisbn_list=0429625278&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=EBC5773180_15_96&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |