E-Book
108,99 €

Practical Sustainability Strategies E-Book

George P. Nassos

0,0

108,99 €

Sammeln Sie Punkte in unserem Gutscheinprogramm und kaufen Sie E-Books und Hörbücher mit bis zu 100% Rabatt.
Mehr erfahren.

Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
Kategorie: Fachliteratur
Sprache: Englisch

Beschreibung

A comprehensive guide for developing and implementing ESG strategies that propel sustainable growth and enhance corporate responsibility

Practical Sustainability Strategies: How to Excel in ESG and Gain a Competitive Advantage provides the essential tools needed to implement ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) frameworks. With a strong focus on actionable strategies and practical applications, this real-world guide offers expert insights into how sustainability can drive corporate success while benefiting the environment and society.

In-depth yet accessible chapters bridge the gap between theory and practice, arming readers with proven frameworks to align organizational goals with global sustainability standards. The book covers the latest ESG trends and includes real-world case studies to help readers navigate the evolving landscape.

The updated and expanded third edition builds on previous insights by incorporating the latest trends, tools, and guidelines, including an entirely new chapter on ESG and circular economy, to ensure that businesses stay ahead of the curve. Laying out a clear path to building sustainable, competitive businesses, this book:

Provides the tools and knowledge required to communicate, measure, and report ESG metrics
Empowers organizations to lead with transparency and accountability, positively impacting both their bottom line and the wider world
Includes PowerPoint slides for instructors and trainers to facilitate effective teaching and learning
Addresses both advanced and specialist levels, suitable for professionals and students at various stages in their careers
Contains numerous case studies and practical templates based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Standards

Ideal for graduate-level students studying sustainability, corporate social responsibility, business strategy, and corporate governance, Practical Sustainability Strategies: How to Excel in ESG and Gain a Competitive Advantage, Third Edition is also a valuable resource for C-Suite executives and sustainability managers, including Chief Sustainability Officers looking to deepen their knowledge and improve their organization’s ESG performance; as well as for government organizations and NGOs.

Details

Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:

Android

iOS

von Legimi
zertifizierten E-Readern

Seitenzahl: 603

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025

Bewertungen

0,0

Rezensionen(0 Rezensionen)

Ähnliche

Für immer aufgeräumt – auch digital

Jürgen Kurz

Der Weg zum erfolgreichen Unternehmer

Stefan Merath

Der Weg zum erfolgreichen Unternehmer

Stefan Merath

Denke (nach) und werde reich

Napoleon Hill

30 Minuten Resilienz

Ulrich Siegrist

Krebszellen mögen keine Himbeeren - Der große Bestseller - Vollständig überarbeitet und aktualisiert

Richard Béliveau

Die Hormonrevolution

Michael E Platt

Der Crash ist die Lösung

Matthias Weik

Günter, der innere Schweinehund, lernt verkaufen

Stefan Frädrich

Mission erfüllt

Owen Mark

Die Leber wächst mit ihren Aufgaben

Dr. med. Eckart von Hirschhausen

Macht, was ihr liebt!

Anja Förster

Kopf schlägt Kapital

Günter Faltin

Der größte Raubzug der Geschichte

Matthias Weik

Der Mann und das Holz

Lars Mytting

Unsere Hunde - gesund durch Homöopathie

Hans Günter Wolff

Die Jahrhundertlüge, die nur Insider kennen

Heiko Schrang

Organisation für Komplexität

Niels Pfläging

Power: Die 48 Gesetze der Macht

Robert Greene

The Truth About Employee Engagement

Patrick M. Lencioni

Leseprobe

Cover

Table of Contents

Title Page

Preface of George P. Nassos

Preface of Nikos Avlonas

About the Companion Website

Part I: Introduction to Sustainability and ESG Concepts

1 Urgency to Adopt Sustainability

Creation of the Environment

Exceeding the Ecological Footprint

The Limits to Growth

Consumption Factor

Conservation of Water

The Depletion of Fossil Fuels

Climate Change

Population Growth

The Environment's Big Four

References

2 Development of the Sustainability Concept

Sustainability and the Triple Bottom Line

Advent of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Along Came ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance)

The Sustainable Development Concept Thousands of Years Ago

The Next Phase of Sustainability

References

3 The Importance of ESG Criteria

ESG Criteria

References

4 Legislation Leading to Sustainability

United States

International

References

Part II: Sustainable Strategies

5 Imbedding the UN Sustainable Development Goals to Achieve Sustainability

UN 2030 Agenda

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals

A Further Look at the SDGs

References

6 Addressing Climate Change

Energy: Wind Turbines (Onshore)

Energy: Solar Farms

Energy: Nuclear Fission and Fusion

Energy: Heat Pumps and Geothermal

Materials: Refrigeration

Materials: Alternative Cement

Food: Reduced Food Waste

Food: Plant‐Rich Diet

Women and Girls: Educating Girls and Family Planning

Buildings and Cities: District Heating

Buildings and Cities: Insulation

Land Use: Tropical Forests

Land Use: Temperate Forests

Transport: Electric Vehicles

Transport: Ships

List of Tables

Chapter 1

Table 1.1 Ecological footprint for 2022.

Chapter 6

Table 6.1 Drawdown: top solutions.

Table 6.2 Drawdown: top 20 solutions.

Chapter 21

Table 21.1 GM sustainable development goals map.

Chapter 22

Table 22.1 Stakeholder engagement by Campbell Soup Company.

Table 22.2 Stakeholder engagement by TD.

Table 22.3 Stakeholder engagement by CANON [9].

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1

Figure 1.1 Limits of growth.

Figure 1.2 Distribution of earth's water.

Figure 1.3 Hubbert's peak.

Figure 1.4 World population growth.

Chapter 2

Figure 2.1 Triple bottom line.

Figure 2.2 Realistic triple bottom line.

Chapter 5

Figure 5.1 2015–2030 sustainable development goals.

Figure 5.2 Sustainable development goals as a pyramid.

Chapter 7

Figure 7.1 The funnel.

Chapter 11

Figure 11.1 Diminishing returns.

Figure 11.2 Tunneling through the cost barrier.

Chapter 12

Figure 12.1 Abalone shell—stronger than ceramic.

Figure 12.2 Rhinoceros horn—made of keratin.

Figure 12.3 Fish behavior avoids collisions.

Figure 12.4 Fish behavior rules.

Figure 12.5 Nissan's robot car inspired by fish.

Figure 12.6 Cheetah inspiring fast robots.

Figure 12.7 Fastest robot inspired by cheetah.

Figure 12.8 Structure with circles.

Figure 12.9 Structure with triangles.

Figure 12.10 Structure with squares.

Figure 12.11 Structure with pentagons.

Figure 12.12 Structure with hexagons.

Figure 12.13 Beehive—most efficient structure.

Figure 12.14 Hummingbird‐inspired wind turbines.

Figure 12.15 Eel‐inspired power.

Figure 12.16 Shark scales.

Figure 12.17 Pine cones for energy‐efficient buildings.

Chapter 13

Figure 13.1 Base of economic pyramid.

Figure 13.2 Great leap downward. (a) Instead of selling to the top of the py...

Figure 13.3 How electricity powers well‐being.

Chapter 14

Figure 14.1 Bank of America Tower.

Figure 14.2 The Bullitt Center.

Figure 14.3 Bullitt Center solar array.

Figure 14.4 Bullitt Center energy consumption.

Chapter 15

Figure 15.1 Flowchart of Kalundborg's circular economy.

Figure 15.2 Infographic of circular economy.

Figure 15.3 MSW versus GNT.

Chapter 16

Figure 16.1 Gross national trash.

Figure 16.2 Waste incinerator.

Figure 16.3 Steam boiler with steam turbine.

Chapter 19

Figure 19.1 Toilet using gray water.

Figure 19.2 Urinals with sink for flushing.

Figure 19.3 AeroFarms, Newark, NJ.

Guide

Cover

Title Page

Table of Contents

Preface of George P. Nassos

Preface of Nikos Avlonas

About the Companion Website

Begin Reading

Index

End User License Agreement

Pages

iii

xvii

xviii

xix

xxi

xxii

xxiii

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

113

114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

125

126

127

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172

173

174

175

176

177

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232

233

234

235

236

237

239

240

241

243

245

246

247

248

249

250

251

252

253

254

255

256

257

258

259

260

261

262

263

264

265

266

267

268

269

271

272

273

274

275

276

277

278

279

280

281

282

283

284

285

286

287

288

289

290

291

293

294

295

296

297

298

299

300

301

302

303

304

305

306

307

308

309

310

311

312

313

314

315

316

317

318

319

320

321

322

323

324

325

326

327

328

329

330

331

332

333

334

335

337

338

339

340

341

342

343

344

345

347

348

349

350

351

352

353

354

355

356

357

358

359

361

362

363

365

366

367

368

369

370

371

372

373

374

375

376

Practical Sustainability Strategies

How to Excel in ESG and Gain a Competitive Advantage

Third Edition

George P. Nassos

George P. Nassos & AssociatesGlenview, Illinois, USA

Nikos Avlonas

Centre for Sustainability and ExcellenceAthens, Greece

Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey.

Published simultaneously in Canada.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per‐copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750‐8400, fax (978) 750‐4470, or on the web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748‐6011, fax (201) 748‐6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permission.

The manufacturer's authorized representative according to the EU General Product Safety Regulation is Wiley‐VCH GmbH, Boschstr. 12, 69469 Weinheim, Germany, e-mail: [email protected].

Trademarks: Wiley and the Wiley logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and/or its affiliates in the United States and other countries and may not be used without written permission. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. is not associated with any product or vendor mentioned in this book.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Further, readers should be aware that websites listed in this work may have changed or disappeared between when this work was written and when it is read. Neither the publisher nor authors shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages.

For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762‐2974, outside the United States at (317) 572‐3993 or fax (317) 572‐4002.

Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may not be available in electronic formats. For more information about Wiley products, visit our web site at www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging‐in‐Publication Data Applied for:

Hardback ISBN: 9781394263769

Cover Design: Wiley

Preface of George P. Nassos

About 45 years ago, I had the fortune to work for a subsidiary of an American international chemical company that was headquartered in Cologne, Germany. While experiencing many great times during the three years I lived in Europe, there were a few that stood out because of their impact on the natural environment and energy efficiency. Here are three that I will never forget, as they planted the seed for my interest in energy and sustainability.

I was walking to the subway and had to take the escalator to the lower level. When I arrived for the first time, I was disappointed that the escalator was not operating. So, I did what I would normally do under such a circumstance—walk down the stationary escalator. As soon as I took the first step to walk down, the escalator started and continued to operate until I reached my destination. With no one else on the escalator, it stopped when I got off. There was a pressure switch under the first step that activated the motor. That really made sense. Why should it be operating when no one was using the escalator?

I was participating in a business meeting at a high‐rise office building in the La Defense suburb of Paris. Sitting in a conference room on the 40th floor with nothing but windows on the outside wall, I couldn't help but notice that from time to time the lights would go off and later come back on. After witnessing this occurrence two or three times, I asked the hosts if they were having problems with their electrical supply. I was embarrassed to learn that light sensors controlled the need for artificial light when the sunlight was insufficient. The turning on and off of the lights on that day was due to a partly cloudy day.

I lived in an apartment building two blocks from the Rhine River and about six or seven kilometers south of the city center where my company office was located. My commute to the office was by driving on a four‐lane boulevard along the river. About every kilometer was an intersection with stoplights to allow traffic to enter or exit the boulevard. In addition to these traffic lights at the intersections, digital signals existed on the boulevard about midway between the intersections. These digital signals would indicate what speed the cars should travel to arrive at the next intersection with a green light. Also amazing was that this system worked for cars traveling in both directions. This system provided several benefits like reduced fuel consumption, reduced emissions, reduced congestion, and reduced stress. I am not sure how many years this system was in operation prior to my experiencing it, but it surely made sense.

After working for the chemical company for 16 years, I returned to the United States and joined an environmental company for the next 15 years. A combination of my experiences in Europe and Germany, in particular, along with my work at the environmental company convinced me that this was a field of great interest. I then decided to enter the academic field and combine my chemical and environmental background with my business background (as I also have an MBA) and teach at a graduate business school. I wanted to offer students a combination of teaching theory as well as business experiences in the real world. I was fortunate to learn that the Illinois Institute of Technology—Stuart School of Business had just developed a new program—the MS in Environmental Management—and the dean was looking for a director of the program. This was a great fit for both the school and me.

During my first year at the school in 1997, I attended the fourth annual BELL (Business Environment Learning & Leadership) Conference sponsored by the World Resources Institute (WRI). The meeting focused on sustainability, and it was my first exposure to sustainability, as I had never heard of the word being used in this context. I found it very interesting, and after attending the fifth annual BELL Conference, I was convinced that this concept would be extremely important in the future of our planet. During the next academic year, I introduced sustainability into the capstone course I was teaching and renamed it “Business Strategy: The Sustainable Enterprise” and embedded this concept in most of the other courses offered. I then changed the program name to the MS in Environmental Management and Sustainability. This program was eventually ranked No. 11 in the world by the Beyond Grey Pinstripes biennial survey.

I became so interested in sustainable strategies that I researched the topic on a continuous basis and added new strategies and case studies to the course almost every year. Since about 80% of the students were working professionals—part‐time students—the final exam for the course was a project rather than the typical written exam. Each student was challenged to apply one of the sustainability strategies to their workplace and show how it would enhance the company, a subsidiary, or a strategic business unit (SBU) in terms of environmental integrity, social equity, and economic viability. If it didn't, I didn't want to hear about it. Full‐time students who were not working for a company had the option to select a publicly held company or create a new one based on the sustainability strategy. In addition to writing a three‐ or four–page report for their final exam, each student was required to make a 10‐minute presentation so all the students could learn from their effort. Consequently, the final exam period was not just the last week of the semester but usually took three weeks for all the presentations.

In addition to researching new strategies, I was also interested in books about sustainability. Over the previous 10 years, I did not come across any book that dealt with the various sustainability strategies I was teaching. I am convinced that sustainability should not be a discipline in a business school like marketing, accounting, finance, or organizational behavior, but rather should be imbedded in all the appropriate courses. All graduates of a business school should understand the sustainability concept and its benefits. This book was written to enhance business programs at any or all business schools. It can also be used as the basis for a course on sustainability or as a reference to cover the topic in one or two modules of any other business course.

This does not mean that the book has been written only for business schools. Small‐ and medium‐sized companies, as well as large corporations, will certainly benefit from the contents of this book. In addition, government agencies and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) will also benefit by adopting selective strategies. Just as I am convinced that sustainability should not be a discipline in a business school, it should not be the responsibility of an individual or department within a company or organization. Sustainability should be imbedded in the culture of the organization so that everyone can work together to achieve their goal of operating as a truly sustainable company.

A number of years ago, I had the pleasure of meeting Nikos Avlonas, CEO and Founder of the Center for Sustainability and Excellence, an organization that trains and consults in the sustainability field. His expertise lies in the measurement of sustainability metrics that are used to determine how well the organization is performing and in the reporting of its activities. Consequently, it made sense to join forces and write a book about strategies, measurements, reporting, and communicating.

Although I retired from IIT—Stuart School of Business in 2011, I joined the Driehaus College of Business at DePaul University in 2017 as Director of the MS in Sustainability Management program until the COVID‐19 pandemic in 2020. I am now Dean of Environmental Sustainability at the Ariston Institute of Chicago, a nonprofit business school which employs a unique and innovative approach to environmentally sensitive global education. Consequently, I am continuing to do what I love best: training more disciples in the field of environmental and social sustainability.

George P. NassosGlenview, Illinois, USA

Preface of Nikos Avlonas

In today's rapidly evolving business landscape, sustainability and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices have shifted from being niche concerns to central pillars of corporate strategy. The urgent need now is for practical, actionable strategies that seamlessly integrate sustainability and ESG into everyday operations.

Practical Sustainability Strategies: How to Excel in ESG and Gain A Competitive Advantage, third edition, is designed to guide businesses and educate practitioners and students through this transformative process. It provides concrete, hands‐on tools, CSE's research findings, case studies, and insights that will empower organizations to excel in an increasingly conscious ESG market. This book offers a roadmap for integrating sustainability into core business practices, helping companies reduce environmental impact, improve social responsibility, and ensure robust governance structures—all while boosting profitability and reputation.

It is worth mentioning that in this book we have included all the practical global experience I gained from the Centre for Sustainability & Excellence (CSE) that was founded two decades ago. CSE is one of the global thought leaders in Sustainability Strategic Advisory, Research, and Training. With a presence across North America, Europe, MENA, and Asia, CSE has had a profound impact on driving sustainability initiatives worldwide. Additionally, over the past years, I have been honored to receive several prestigious recognitions for my contributions to Sustainability, including being named one of the “Top 100 Thought Leaders in Trustworthy Business Behavior,” Sustainability Professional of the Year by the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, and being included among the Top 100 Environmental leaders in the United States.

Passionate about spreading the flame of sustainability, I have taught as an adjunct professor at renowned institutions such as DePaul University, University of Illinois in Chicago, and Athens University of Economics and Business. I have also had the privilege of speaking at global conferences and educating over 10,000 professionals and students.

I hope this book will accompany students, practitioners, and enthusiasts well on their Sustainability journey

Nikos Avlonas

Athens, Greece

About the Companion Website

This book is accompanied by a companion website:

www.wiley.com/go/Nassos/PracticalSustainabilityStrategies_3e

The website includes:

PPT slides

Part IIntroduction to Sustainability and ESG Concepts

1Urgency to Adopt Sustainability

It has been over 60 years since we started reading books or articles about the environment with Silent Spring by Rachel Carson being one of the first important books published in 1962. Many other outstanding books have been written about the environment since then such as The Ecology of Commerce by Paul Hawken in 1993, Natural Capitalism by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins in 2008, and Hot, Flat and Crowded by Thomas L. Friedman, in 2008. The number and frequency of new books have increased as more and more people are concerned about the state of the environment.

Very few people question the decline in the state of our environment, only the degree to which it has deteriorated or the rate at which it is continuing to deteriorate. Regardless of the current status of our environment, it is important to put in perspective what has happened to our earth since its creation. Historians estimate that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old, but it is difficult to understand exactly what this means. What does one billion really mean? Let's consider a situation where a 21‐year‐old girl is given US$1 billion as a gift, and she places the money in a non‐interest‐bearing account. She will be able to spend US$60,000 every day of her life until she retires at the age of, say, 65 and still have US$36 million left over for retirement. This gives someone a better understanding of what one billion really means.

So how can we put 4.5 billion years in perspective so that we can understand what has happened to the earth since its creation? As suggested by David Brower [1], former Executive Director of the Sierra Club, let us compress the geologic time, from the initial formation of the earth until now, into the six days of biblical creation [2], from Monday to Saturday.

Creation of the Environment

Using the compressed time scale, the earth was formed at midnight, the beginning of the first day, Monday. There is no life until Tuesday at about 8:00 a.m., and millions of species begin to appear and disappear throughout the week. Photosynthesis begins and it gets into high gear by Thursday morning, just after midnight. By Saturday, the sixth and last day of creation, there is sufficient oxygen in the atmosphere that amphibians can come onto land, and enough chlorophyll manufactured for the vegetation to begin to form coal deposits. The giant reptiles appear around 4:00 p.m. and primates show up at 10:00 p.m. on this last day, but Homo sapiens don't appear until 11:59:54—just six seconds ago. In other words, if we compress the age of the earth to six days, or 144 hours, “man” is not created until the last six seconds. A quarter of a second to midnight, Jesus Christ appears. One‐fortieth of a second ago is the beginning of the industrial age, and one‐eightieth of a second ago, we discover oil, thus accelerating the carbon blowout started by the industrial revolution.

Scientists have predicted that this 4.5‐billion‐year‐old earth will be around for another “week.” But look at the damage that has been done in just the past one‐fortieth of a second. Almost 90% of the major fisheries have been depleted or are at their biological limit [3]. It is estimated that the forest cover has been reduced by as much as 40% worldwide [4], 50% of the wetlands [5], and more than 95% of the US grasslands have been lost [6]. By 2025, two‐thirds of the world's population may face water shortages [7]. The big question now is how long will we last, another one‐fortieth of a second—about five generations? Or will we be able to survive for another quarter of a second—about 2000 years? Or can we make a difference to extend a healthy world to some indefinite period of time? Or is it too late, and are we during a period of overshooting the carrying capacity of the earth, followed by a rapid collapse?

God did not create the natural environment for the benefit of the people so they can use and misuse it. The environment can be used indefinitely if it is replenished. It has the capacity to support the needs of living creatures—plants and animals, including humans—but only a finite number. Think about what happened when God created this earth. It consisted of trees, flowers, vegetables, birds, animals, fish, soil, and water. The trees produced blossoms to bear fruits, and the blossoms fell to the ground to enrich the soil. Birds would eat the fruits and seeds would fall to the ground. Seed would produce more trees. Animals would eat the plants and eat even the smaller animals. When animals die, they become food for other animals or fertilize the soil. Nature was designed to sustain itself and produce no waste. This was an early example of the circular economy that will be discussed later.

If this carrying capacity is exceeded to the degree that it cannot be replenished, the population that it is supporting will decrease significantly. This can be demonstrated by a real experiment conducted by scientists several years ago.

Exceeding the Ecological Footprint

Near the end of World War II in 1944, the United States Coast Guard placed 29 reindeer on St. Matthew Island in the Bering Sea, just southwest of Alaska, as an emergency food supply for the US military. This island consisted primarily of vegetation and was void of any predators. Specialists had calculated that the island could support between 13 and 18 reindeer per square mile, or a total population of between 1600 and 2300 animals.

In 1957, the population was 1350; but just six years later in 1963, the population had exploded to 6000. Were the scientists wrong in their calculations of how many reindeer the island could support?

Eventually, it was determined that the original calculations had been correct. The 6000 reindeer vastly exceeded the carrying capacity of the island, and they were soon decimated by disease, starvation, and extreme weather conditions. Such a drastic overshoot, however, did not lead to restabilization at a lower level with some of the reindeer dying off. Instead, the entire habitat was so damaged by the overshot of reindeer that the number of animals fell far short of the original carrying capacity. In 1966, just three years later, there were only 42 reindeer living on St. Matthew Island rather than the expected 1600–2300. The reduction was primarily due to disease and starvation.

This is an example of what could happen to the earth. In the case of St. Matthew Island, the resources used by the reindeer were grasses, trees, and shrubs, all renewable resources that can be replenished. Many of the resources necessary for human survival, however, are not renewable. There is only a finite quantity of resources such as minerals, oil, and coal. We must be cognizant of the over‐utilization of both renewable and non‐renewable resources.

To examine this over‐utilization of the earth's resources, we must look at a concept called the ecological footprint. This is a tool for measuring and analyzing human natural resource consumption and waste output within the context of nature's renewable and regenerative capacity (or bio‐capacity). It represents a quantitative assessment of the biologically productive area required to produce the resources (food, energy, and materials) and to absorb the waste of an individual or region. In terms of resources, it includes cropland, grazing land, forest, fishing grounds, and built‐up land. The footprint to handle waste output includes the forests required to absorb all the carbon dioxide emissions resulting from the individual's energy consumption.

To be certain, we don't exceed the carrying capacity of the earth; the footprint for humanity must be within the annual regenerative capability of nature. Similarly, we must not exceed the absorptive capacity of the planet for the handling of the waste that is produced. A sustainable environment will exist if we live within the earth's regenerative and absorptive capacity. If we remove more from nature than can be provided indefinitely, we are on an unsustainable track.

An organization called Global Footprint Network [8] has been calculating and analyzing the ecological footprint of over 200 countries. The footprint refers to the amount of the earth's carrying capacity it takes to sustain humanity's consumption of goods and services, basically the need for food, clothing, shelter, energy, and disposal of waste. According to its calculations, in the late 1970s, humanity's collective ecological footprint breached the sustainability mark for the first time, and it has remained unsustainable ever since. In fact, the deficit for maintaining sustainability has grown every year since then, and it appears that this deficit is on a path to grow further in the foreseeable future. Currently, it is estimated that we need 1.7 earths to ensure that future generations are as well off as we are today.

It is interesting to note the variation in the ecological footprint by region or nation as seen in Table 1.1. Surprisingly, the largest footprint belongs to Qatar where it is 35.6 acres per capita. This means that for each individual living in Qatar, about 36 acres are necessary to provide the consumptive and disposal needs for that person. By comparison, the footprint of the United States is 20 acres. Two additional questions that might be asked are as follows: (i) Is the footprint increasing with time? and (ii) How does this footprint compare with the available capacity? Growth in the ecological footprint can be attributed to an increase in population, an increase in consumption, or both. Of the Western European countries, Sweden, Belgium, Portugal, Spain, and Switzerland have increasing footprints, while Denmark and the Netherlands are making concerted efforts to reduce their footprints. The most striking result of this ecological footprint analysis is that if the entire world lived like the people of the United States, it would take over five planet earths to support the present world population.

Table 1.1 Ecological footprint for 2022.

Source: Adapted from [9].

Country

Ecological footprint (acres per capita)

Qatar

32.4

Luxembourg

27.1

United States

18.4

Canada

18.3

Denmark

18.0

Netherlands

14.9

Germany

11.1

Japan

9.9

China

8.9

World

6.4

Mexico

5.7

Iraq

4.3

Bio‐capacity

3.7

India

2.6

Pakistan

1.8

The value shown in bold next to Bio‐capacity shows what the earth generates in one year.

The Limits to Growth

In 1972, a team of MIT experts wrote a report titled The Limits to Growth and presented it to scientists, journalists, and others and shortly published it as a book. It was the first time that computer modeling was used to answer the question of whether the population would outgrow the planet and the resources available. The purpose of the study was to show the interrelationship between global growth factors like population, resources, persistent pollution, food production, and industrial activity. Based on this study, they predicted that if human beings continued to consume more than the environment could provide, there would be an economic collapse and a sharp decline in population by 2030, which is not too far away.

This topic of overshoot and collapse was addressed again in Limits to Growth: A 30‐Year Update[10], which stated that “overshoot can lead to two different outcomes. One is a crash of some kind. Another is a deliberate turnaround, a correction, a careful easing down. We explore these two possibilities as they apply to human society and the planet that supports it. We believe that a correction is possible and that it could lead to a desirable, sustainable, sufficient future for all the world's peoples. We also believe that if a profound correction is not made soon, a crash of some sort is certain. And it will occur within the lifetimes of many who are alive today.”

Although the 1972 report seemed to focus on a very negative scenario, they looked at various changes that could avert a collapse. One positive variable was looking at technological changes that increased agricultural productivity, reduced pollution, and provided an increase in the available supply of natural resources. Technological advancements would have a positive impact, but this alone could not avert a collapse. Social and cultural changes would also be necessary to reduce consumption and stabilize population growth. Since it had been 40 years since the report, data were collected and compared with the predictions. To mark the 40th anniversary of the report, experts gathered to discuss the challenges ahead to a sustainable future. Their concern is depicted in Figure 1.1[11], which shows that the world is following the predictions of the study.

Figure 1.1 Limits of growth.

You can see that with 30 years of data, pollution, industrial output, population, and services per capita are all increasing as expected. At the same time, the remaining non‐renewable resources are decreasing a little slower (good), but food per capita is increasing a little faster than expected (bad). A 2020 study examined updated quantitative information about ten factors, namely population, fertility rates, mortality rates, industrial output, food production, services, non‐renewable resources, persistent pollution, human welfare, and ecological footprint, and concluded that the “Limits to Growth” prediction is essentially correct in that continued economic growth is unsustainable under a “business as usual” model. The study found that current empirical data are broadly consistent with the 1972 projections and that if major changes to the consumption of resources are not undertaken, economic growth will peak and then rapidly decline by around 2040 [12].

The study was also concerned with sustainable development, which was defined by the notion that the developed nations can keep what they have while the poor people try to catch up. Or perhaps, keep on doing what we are all doing, but through technological advances, we can expect less pollution and use fewer resources. Unfortunately, we are failing with this expectation. We are currently consuming 70% more than what the earth can provide as explained earlier by the ecological footprint.

What we are consuming can be described as the different forms of industrial capital. This capital really refers to the machines and factories that produce the manufactured goods. These products manufactured by the industrial capital can be defined as industrial output. This industrial output derived from industrial capital can be used to generate service capital for the service industry, like banks, schools, and hospitals, which provide services for the people. Industrial capital is also converted to agricultural capital to generate agricultural output. Likewise, it is converted to resource‐obtaining capital to generate resource output. In addition, industrial capital is used to manufacture consumer goods. As each of these industrial outputs continues to grow, there is a need for more capital to be invested in the factories and machines that serve each of the outputs. Consequently, there may be an exponentially growing requirement for industrial output to expand the capacity for production in the future. This leads to more and more consumption.

Consumption Factor

Another way of looking at the overuse of the earth's resources is to talk about consumption. There is a great variation today in consumption of the many nations in the world. Consumption is defined as the needs of people for survival in terms of food, energy, materials, and the disposal of waste. The disparity in the consumption rate is that it is 32 times greater in the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Japan, and Australia than in developing countries [13].

In 2023, the world population reached 8.1 billion people of whom only about one billion live in the fully developed countries listed earlier. By the middle of this century, it is estimated that the world population could grow to 9.5 billion people, and there are questions as to whether the earth can support this number of people or will it collapse. It is not really a question of how many people are on this earth, but what is the consumption rate of these people?

People in third‐world countries are aware of a major difference in the consumption rate per capita, although they probably don't know the magnitude of the difference. In general, their goal is to catch up to the developed countries, but if they believe their chances of catching up are hopeless, they could get frustrated, angry, or even participate in terrorist activities. Another option is to immigrate to a first‐world country like the United States and Western Europe, but then they would contribute to the consumption rate of that country.

If one considers the fastest‐growing economy in China, these people are already aspiring to increase their consumption to the 32 factors. If the Chinese were to succeed, it would be equivalent to doubling the world's consumption rate. If India were to do the same thing, the consumption rate would then triple. If the entire world had the same consumption rate as these first‐world countries, it would be the same as having 72 billion people on this planet at the current consumption rates—and there is no way the earth could handle this.

Since we are in no position to restrict the rest of the world from improving their quality of life, the only answer is that the high‐consuming countries mentioned earlier must lower their consumption rate. But will they do it for the benefit of the rest of the world? Whether they want to or not, they must reduce their consumption rate because what they are doing today is not sustainable.

If these countries reluctantly agree to reduce their consumption rate, does it mean that they will have to reduce their quality of life? Definitely not! For example, the people in Western Europe consume half as much oil (gasoline) per capita than the people in the United States. But the Western European standard of living is considered higher than that in the United States in terms of life expectancy, healthcare, infant mortality, vacation time, quality of public schools, and several other criteria. Does a large gas‐guzzling automobile really contribute positively to any of these quality‐of‐life factors? Probably not!

The current state of the environment can also be presented by looking at four major environmental issues: (i) water scarcity, (ii) energy sources, (iii) climate change, and (iv) population growth.

Conservation of Water

Water is a natural resource with a finite quantity. The amount of water on this planet 2000 years ago is the same as it is today, but the population during this time interval has gone from approximately 170 million to over 8 billion. But of all the water on the earth, how much is readily available to all living creatures? Figure 1.2[14] provides a summary of the current situation.

Figure 1.2 Distribution of earth's water.

The earth's surface is about 71% water; however, 97.5% of all the water on earth is saline. Of the remaining 2.5%, 68.7% is in the form of ice caps and glaciers, 30.1% is groundwater, and 0.9% is in some other unavailable form. This leaves only 0.3% of the fresh water on earth available to us on the surface with 87% in lakes, 11% in swamps, and 2% in rivers. This means that only 0.1% of all the water on the earth is available for industrial, agricultural, and human use. And of these three general uses, 70% is for agricultural use, 20% for industrial use, and only 10% for human consumption. Going further with the calculations results in only 0.01% of all the water on the earth being consumed by humans, and as the population grows, that leaves less for everyone.

According to the United Nations, two‐thirds of the world's population is projected to face water scarcity by 2025. In the United States, a federal report [15] by the General Accounting Office shows that 40 of the 50 states were anticipating water shortages by 2023. In 2008, the state of Georgia tried, unsuccessfully, to move the state's border north to claim part of the Tennessee River.

The concern for this water shortage is partly due to the companies that require so much for their processes. It takes roughly 20 gal of water to make a pint of beer, about 130 gal of water to make a two‐liter bottle of soda, about 35 gallons to make a cup of coffee, and about 500 gal of water to make a pair of Levi's stonewashed jeans. Why so much? For soda, it includes the water used to grow ingredients such as sugarcane, and for coffee mostly to grow coffee beans. For the jeans, it includes the water used to grow, dye, and process the cotton.

Companies are now calculating the “water footprint” to manage better the water consumption. This is not dissimilar to the carbon footprint that organizations and individuals have been calculating for some years. The water‐footprint concept was first developed in 2002 by A.Y. Hoekstra at the University of Twente in the Netherlands [16] (see Chapter 26 for more detail). Following the water‐footprint concept, studies were conducted to calculate the embedded, or virtual, water required for a product, which was then added to what is consumed directly. Embedded water includes everything from raising beef in South America, growing oranges in Spain, or growing cotton in Asia. By calculating the embedded water, you would learn that a typical hamburger takes 630 gal of water to produce. Most of the water is used to grow the grain to feed the cattle. This represents more than three times the amount the average American uses every day for drinking, bathing, washing dishes, and flushing toilets.

At first glance, these large numbers representing water footprints for certain products seem very alarming. However, they are not necessarily bad if there is available water, and it is well managed. Since most of the water is used for crops, it becomes part of the water cycle where it is eventually evaporated, or it is runoff. This water becomes temporarily unavailable for other uses, but that is not really a problem in an area that has plentiful water. If it doesn't return to the same aquifer or returns as rainfall in another region, this could be a problem.

The Depletion of Fossil Fuels

In 1956, M. King Hubbert, a scientist with Shell Oil, proposed that fossil fuel production in each region over time would follow a roughly bell‐shaped curve without giving a precise formula [17]. Hubbert assumed that after fossil fuel reserves are discovered, production at first increases approximately exponentially, as more extraction commences and more efficient facilities are installed. At some point, a peak output is reached, and production begins declining until it approximates an exponential decline as shown in Figure 1.3.

Figure 1.3 Hubbert's peak.

The Hubbert curve suggests that the oil production rate increases as more reserves are discovered, and the rate peaks when half the estimated ultimately recoverable oil is produced. This is followed by a falling production rate, all along a classic bell curve. This same analysis has shown that it took 110 years to produce about 225 billion barrels of crude oil in the United States, but half of that oil was produced in the first 100 years and the second half in the next 10 years. In the United States, Hubbert predicted that this production rate peak would be achieved in 1970, the year when half of the estimated ultimately recoverable oil was utilized and then production would start its steady decline. That in fact is what happened when the United States lost its preeminence as the world's leading producer of oil and caused a spike in gasoline prices and long lines at the pumps. His prediction that the United States would peak in oil production in 1970 came true although it peaked 17% higher than he projected, and its pathway since has not followed the bell‐shaped curve he predicted. On a global basis, this milestone was expected to occur around the year 2010. What has happened since Hubbert's predictions is that more reserves have been discovered and new extraction technologies have been applied. It is now expected that the current oil reserves should last at least until 2050 [18]. Based on a similar analysis, natural gas reserves are good for 53 more years and coal reserves for at least 100 years.

Climate Change

In 1988, the United Nations General Assembly created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) with the task of reviewing and assessing the most recent scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information produced worldwide relevant to the understanding of climate change. Further, it would provide the world with a clear scientific view of the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and socioeconomic consequences, notably the risk of climate change caused by human activity.

The first assessment report of the IPCC was presented in 1990 and along with subsequent reports led scientists to conclude that the earth cannot tolerate more than a 3–5 °F increase in temperature. In order not to exceed this level, carbon dioxide emissions must be reduced by 60–80% of the 1990 levels by the year 2050. The first in a series of international meetings took place in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, called the Rio Earth Summit. As a result of that meeting, five years later the Kyoto Protocol was adopted. It recognized that climate change was a result of greenhouse gases (GHGs) created by human industrial activity. The idea was that rich nations, which had already benefited from industrialization, would reduce their GHG emissions in the first part of the treaty and developing nations would join in later. Milestones were created in various intervals through the year 2050. One of the milestones was to reduce GHG by 5% below 1990 levels by 2012. Instead, the world increased GHG in 2012 by 58% above 1990 levels as the Kyoto Protocol came to an end.

At the next international meeting, which took place in Doha, Qatar, at the end of 2012, the developing countries once again demanded, as they did in Kyoto in 1997, for the rich countries to make a commitment to set real targets for reducing their GHG output. The rich nations then agreed to make some commitment toward a stronger legal agreement when they would meet in Paris in 2015.

The primary goals of the Paris Agreement were to hold the increase in the global average temperature to less than 2 °C from pre‐industrial levels, but also achieve net zero GHG emissions beginning in 2050. Each country made a pledge to reduce carbon emissions commensurate with its rate of emissions along with its technical ability. For instance, the United States committed to reducing emissions 26–28% below 2005 levels by 2025. To achieve these goals, the public and private sectors must act boldly and quickly to reduce the use of fossil fuels and increase renewables as quickly as possible. In addition, if the technology can be developed, sequestering more carbon from the atmosphere would really enhance the goals of the agreement.

For the Paris Agreement to be successful, all these countries, particularly the developed countries, must make the necessary investments in educating the masses, adopting renewable energy, reducing the use of fossil fuels, and developing carbon capture technology. But this will take a major financial commitment. For that reason, the next meeting of this Conference of Parties (COP22) took place in November 2016 in Marrakech, Morocco, to act on the Paris Agreement including obtaining financial commitments from each of the countries and to establish plans for tracking progress by each country. This is all going in the right direction, but none of these laws is binding.

Another measure of the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere is the actual average concentration in parts per million (ppm). Since the beginning of human civilization up until about 200 years ago, our atmosphere contained about 275 ppm [19] of carbon dioxide. A concentration of 275 ppm CO2 is a useful amount—without some CO2 and other GHGs that trap heat in our atmosphere, our planet would be too cold for humans to inhabit. In 2008, James Hansen, the top NASA climatologist indicated: “If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm” [20]. This level of 350 ppm has been the target of many environmentalists and even Bill McKibben, who founded a worldwide organization to curb global warming, named his organization “https://350.org” [21]. Unfortunately, we are heading in the wrong direction as scientific instruments have shown that the earth's average carbon dioxide concentration reached 424 ppm in 2023 [22].

The UN's summit Conference of Parties, COP28, took place in December 2023 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates and ended a month later with an agreement signed by 198 countries calling for a transition away from fossil fuels to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 [23]. The final agreement stopped short of calling for a “phase out” of oil and gas usage—supported by 100 countries including the United States, Canada, and the European Union—due to fierce pushback from the Saudi Arabia‐led Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) bloc of oil‐producing nations. Tripling global renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency improvements by 2030 were key targets agreed upon at the summit. The push for cleaner energy is likely to ramp up after EU scientists said that 2023 was the hottest year on record.

There are some scientists, while in the minority, who believe that global warming may exist and/or it is not anthropological. Regardless, reducing carbon dioxide emissions is like an insurance policy. If one assumes that global warming does exist and therefore takes the necessary action, the downside risk is minimal. If we learned in 30 years that global warming never really existed, it would have resulted in unnecessary development of renewable energy sources and possible introduction of a carbon tax. If on the other hand, one assumes that global warming does not exist and therefore takes no action at all, what would happen if this assumption were eventually determined to be incorrect? The result to the world population could be catastrophic with rising sea levels leading to flooding and droughts leading to dwindling food production.

Population Growth

Each of the environmental issues described earlier, consumption, fossil fuel reserves, water scarcity, and climate change are all related to the world population. Figure 1.4[24] provides a summary of the historical as well as the projected growth in population.

Figure 1.4 World population growth.

The world population reached one billion people in 1804, two billion in 1927, five billion in 1987, six billion in 1999, and seven billion in 2011 [25]. In 2023, the world population reached 8.1 billion and growing at a rate of 10 million people every seven to eight weeks [26]. The world population has more than quadrupled in the last 97 years. Most of this growth is in developing countries, which may not be a major problem because of the lower consumption rate. As an example, by 2050, two of every five children will be born in Africa [27] This will lead to 25% of the world population will be in Africa by 2050 [28].

The Environment's Big Four

Today, these are the four major environmental concerns in the world, specifically:

Water quality and quantity

Depletion of natural resources

Climate change resulting primarily from fossil fuels

Population growth—eventually exceeding the earth's capacity

Mitigating the impact of these four major environmental issues leads to an urgency for sustainable development.

Case Studies

How to conserve water: Available at an imaginary conversation between God and St. Francis on the subject of gardens nature and lawns—Beliefnet. Accessed 22 June, 2024.

Issues for Learning and Discussion

Since the global population has an impact on the other three major environmental issues, can we expect the population to continue its rapid growth? How will the growth rate change?

We are consuming natural resources at a rate equivalent to 1.7 earths. What are the major problems and what can be done to resolve them?

Is the consumption rate of the natural resources related to the standard of living?

What are some simple examples of the conservation of fresh water?

A Shell Oil scientist predicted that the production of oil will peak in 1970 when we will have consumed 50% of the inventory. What changed this outlook in 2010?