Refine your search
Collections
Co-Authors
Journals
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z All
Sharma, Anish Kumar
- Urban Sustainability Analysis of Solan District, Himachal Pradesh, India
Abstract Views :167 |
PDF Views:78
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Environmental Science, University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan 173 230, IN
2 School of Sciences, P.P. Savani University, Surat 394 125, IN
1 Department of Environmental Science, University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan 173 230, IN
2 School of Sciences, P.P. Savani University, Surat 394 125, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 120, No 7 (2021), Pagination: 1246-1249Abstract
Urbanization is one of the most significant global trends of modern times, driving and driven by multiple social, economic and environmental processes. Due to uncontrolled urbanization, there is rapid environmental degradation which causes many problems. Scientific assessments can help provide solutions by considering the local realities. Numerous assessment strategies have been suggested such as emerge analysis, material flow analysis, data development analysis and ecological footprint analysis (EFA). EFA has been implemented as a useful analytical and planning tool for assessing urban sustainability in numerous cities. The aim of this study is to use one of the EFA components, viz. built-up land footprint (EFbuilt-up) to evaluate the urban sustainability of Solan district, Himachal Pradesh (HP), India, in terms of settlements. The study concludes that EFbuilt-up of Solan district, HP, exceeds its biocapacity, resulting in an ecological deficit. Therefore, element of built-up land in Solan district is considered as an unsustainable system.Keywords
Biocapacity, Built-Up Land Footprint, Ecological Footprint Analysis, Ecological Deficit, Urban Sustainability.Full Text
References
- Schell, L. M. and Ulijaszek, S. J., Urbanism, Health and Human Biology in Industrialized Countries, Cambridge University Press, London, UK, 1999, pp. 59–60.
- Vandijk, M. and Mingshun, Z., Sustainability indices as a tool for urban managers, evidence from four medium-sized Chinese cities. Environ. Impact Assess., 2005, 25(6), 667–688.
- Partridge, E., Social sustainability: a useful theoretical framework. In Social Sustainability, Australasian Political Science Association Annual Conference, Dunedin, New Zealand, 2009.
- Moussiopoulos, N., Achillas, C., Vlachokostas, C., Spyridi, D. and Nikolaou, K., Environmental, social and economic information management for the evaluation of sustainability in urban areas: a system of indicators for Thessaloniki, Greece. Cities, 2010, 27(5), 377–384.
- Repetti, A. and Desthieux, G., A relational indicator set model for urban land-use planning and management: methological approach and application in two case studies. Landsc. Urban Plann., 2006, 77(11), 196–215.
- Hernández, M. S. and De, H. M. J., Indicators of urban sustainability in Mexico. Theor. Empirical Res. Urban Manage., 2010, 7(16), 46–60.
- Kotharkar, R., Bahadure, S., Bahadure, P. and Surawar, M., Measurability for sustainable urban development: concept to application. ABACUS J. Archit. Conserv. Urban Stud., 2011, 7(2), 72–87.
- Monfreda, C., Wackernagel, M. and Deumling, D., Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity accounts. Land Use Policy, 2004, 21(1), 231–246.
- Wilson, J. and Anielski, M., Ecological footprints of Canadian municipalities and regions. Canadian Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Canada, 2005, p. 59.
- GoI, Census of India 2001: size, growth and distribution of population in India. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, 2011, pp. 1–60.
- Kandil, R. A., Sarhan, A. and Abdelgalil, R. E., Urban ecological footprint analysis as an evaluation tool for sustainability: analysis of the built-up land footprint of Alexandria city, Egypt. In The Sustainable City XIII, WIT Press, Rome, Italy, 2019, pp. 271– 281.
- Lin, D. et al., Working Guidebook to the National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts, Global Footprint Network, Oakland, CA, USA, 2019.
- Ecological footprint of Solan district, Himachal Pradesh, India
Abstract Views :190 |
PDF Views:87
Authors
Affiliations
1 Department of Environmental Science, University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan 173 230, IN
2 School of Sciences, PP Savani University, Surat 394 125, IN
1 Department of Environmental Science, University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni, Solan 173 230, IN
2 School of Sciences, PP Savani University, Surat 394 125, IN
Source
Current Science, Vol 122, No 8 (2022), Pagination: 978-980Abstract
Unsustainable resource use on earth must be addressed from a variety of perspectives and at multiple levels of governance. Understanding the environmental consequences of urban-dwellers will become increasingly important as the human population urbanizes. Having access to reliable, cross-cutting, quantitative city-level sustainability measures is crucial. By taking into account local facts, scientific analyses can assist in providing solutions. Emergence analysis, material flow analysis, data development analysis and ecological footprint analysis (EFA) are only some of the assessment methodologies that have been offered. EFA has been used to assess urban sustainability in a number of cities as a useful analytical and planning tool. The purpose of this study is to assess the sustainability of Solan district, Himachal Pradesh, India, using four EFA components: crop land, grazing land, forest land and infrastructure land footprints. According to the study, the total ecological footprint of Solan district is 6865.30 gha, and its components are in the following order: crop land footprint (3287.40 gha) > infrastructure land footprint (2088.21 gha) > grazing land footprint (978.03 gha) > forest land footprint (511.67 gha).Keywords
Crop land, ecological footprint analysis, forest land, grazing land, infrastructure land, sustainability.Full Text
References
- Rees, W. E., Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: what urban economics leaves out. Environ. Urban, 1992, 4, 121–130.
- Galli, A., Wiedmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B. and Giljum, S., Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a ‘footprint family’ of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecol. Indic. (Suppl. C), 2012, 16, 100–112.
- Hoekstra, A. Y., Human appropriation of natural capital: a comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis. Ecol. Econ., 2009, 68, 1963–1974.
- Wilson, J. and Anielski, M., Ecological footprints of Canadian municipalities and regions. Canadian Federation of Canadian Municipalities, Canada, 2005, p. 59.
- Sterner, T. et al., Policy design for the Anthropocene. Nature Sustain., 2019, 2, 14–21.
- Meyer, K. and Newman, P., The planetary accounting framework: a novel, quota-based approach to understanding the impacts of any scale of human activity in the context of the planetary boundaries. Sustain. Earth, 2018, 1(4).
- Ward, B. and Dubos, R., Only One Earth: The Care and Maintenance of a Small Planet, Penguin, London, UK, 1972.
- Sala, S., Ciuffo, B. and Nijkamp, P., A systemic framework for sustainability assessment. Ecol. Econ., 2015, 119, 314–325.
- Pulselli, F. M., Moreno Pires, S. and Galli, A., The need for an integrated assessment framework to account for humanity’s pressure on the earth system. In The Safe Operating Space Treaty: A New Approach to Managing our Use of the Earth System (eds Magalhães, P. et al.), Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Cambridge, UK, 2016, pp. 213–245; ISBN-13: 978-1-4438-8903-2.
- Repetti, A. and Desthieux, G., A relational indicator set model for urban land-use planning and management: methological approach and application in two case studies. Landsc. Urban Plann., 2006, 77(11), 196–215.
- Hernández, M. S. and De, H. M. J., Indicators of urban sustainability in Mexico. Theor. Empir. Res. Urban Manage, 2010, 7(16), 46–60.
- Monfreda, C., Wackernagel, M. and Deumling, D., Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity accounts. Land Use Policy, 2004, 21(1), 231–246.
- GoI, Census of India 2001: size, growth and distribution of population in India. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, 2011, pp. 1–60.