Next Article in Journal
Diversity Best Paper Awards for 2015
Next Article in Special Issue
Drastic Population Size Change in Two Populations of the Golden-Striped Salamander over a Forty-Year Period—Are Eucalypt Plantations to Blame?
Previous Article in Journal
The Indian Sundarban Mangrove Forests: History, Utilization, Conservation Strategies and Local Perception
Previous Article in Special Issue
Why Did the Bear Cross the Road? Comparing the Performance of Multiple Resistance Surfaces and Connectivity Modeling Methods

Biodiversity Loss and the Ecological Footprint of Trade

Global Footprint Network, 312 Clay Street, Oakland, CA 94607-3510, USA
Global Footprint Network, 7-9 Chemin de Balexert, 1219 Geneva, Switzerland
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Mario A. Pagnotta
Diversity 2015, 7(2), 170-191;
Received: 26 March 2015 / Revised: 2 June 2015 / Accepted: 2 June 2015 / Published: 9 June 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Biodiversity Loss & Habitat Fragmentation)
Human pressure on ecosystems is among the major drivers of biodiversity loss. As biodiversity plays a key role in supporting the human enterprise, its decline puts the well-being of human societies at risk. Halting biodiversity loss is therefore a key policy priority, as reflected in the 2020 Aichi Biodiversity Targets under strategic goal A. The Ecological Footprint has become a widely used metric for natural capital and ecosystem accounting, and is frequently cited in the sustainability debate, where it is often used for tracking human-induced pressures on ecosystems and biodiversity. Given its potential role as an indirect metric for biodiversity-related policies, this paper breaks down the Ecological Footprint into its components and analyzes resource and ecosystem service flows at an international level. We discuss its usefulness in tracking the underlying drivers of habitat impacts and biodiversity loss. We find that: China is a major net importer of all biomass biocapacity components; the largest net exporters of forest biocapacity are not low-income countries; a very high proportion of the Ecological Footprint of fishing grounds is traded internationally; Singapore and at least three Middle East countries are almost wholly reliant on net imports for the cropland biocapacity they consume. View Full-Text
Keywords: Aichi Targets; biodiversity monitoring; Ecological Footprint; biocapacity; human pressure; displacement Aichi Targets; biodiversity monitoring; Ecological Footprint; biocapacity; human pressure; displacement
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Lazarus, E.; Lin, D.; Martindill, J.; Hardiman, J.; Pitney, L.; Galli, A. Biodiversity Loss and the Ecological Footprint of Trade. Diversity 2015, 7, 170-191.

AMA Style

Lazarus E, Lin D, Martindill J, Hardiman J, Pitney L, Galli A. Biodiversity Loss and the Ecological Footprint of Trade. Diversity. 2015; 7(2):170-191.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lazarus, Elias, David Lin, Jon Martindill, Jeanette Hardiman, Louisa Pitney, and Alessandro Galli. 2015. "Biodiversity Loss and the Ecological Footprint of Trade" Diversity 7, no. 2: 170-191.

Find Other Styles

Article Access Map by Country/Region

Only visits after 24 November 2015 are recorded.
Back to TopTop