Ecological Footprint Essay Sample

Since the Industrial Revolution, many companies and proprietors have participated in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). CSR has focused on many social concerns, such as gender and racial equality, education, and medicine. One of the main targets of CSR today is Environmentalism. Today, many companies are researching how to lessen their ecological footprint while generating industry growth. The main concern of this research is reducing a company’s carbon footprint by using alternative energies like solar or wind. However, alternative energy use is only a part of a way to reduce a company’s ecological footprint. Ecological footprint also includes the use of natural resources and available space on land and in the sea. Ecosystems need to maintain a certain biocapacity to produce valuable materials and absorb carbon dioxide emissions, and companies need to help support these ecosystems to continue business in the future. 

Why is ecological footprint essential to look at from the business perspective? Ecological footprint looks at the impact a person, community, or business has on the environment and the amount of land required to sustain the use of their natural resources. From the business point of view, ecological footprints have everything to do with the scarcity of natural resources and maintaining this level of available resources for future business. As industries grow and the human species expands, it is vital to contemplate how global trade can affect the environment, other species, and impoverished countries. 

Over the past few decades, industries have focused on reducing their environmental impact, and some companies even incorporated strategies into their practices to combat these issues. However, considering these environmental issues constrains businesses when making decisions. In a 2012 article, Joël Houdet found that business activities affect biodiversity loss and are under pressure by stakeholders to minimize negative impacts on ecosystems (Houdet 2012). It is challenging to convert biodiversity and ecological services into monetary amounts since each appraisal is different in size and complexity. These differences add to the lack of strategies for these issues (Houdet 2012). In addition to the constraint it puts on the decision-making process, environmental policies can limit industry growth to protect species and ecosystems.

An example of how a species conservation status can impact an industry is the timber industry and the Northern Spotted Owl. In 1990, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) listed the Northern Spotted Owl as threatened. In 1992, The National Fish and Wildlife Service listed 6.9 million acres of old-growth forest as critical habitats of the Northern Spotted Owl. In 1994, the Northwest Forest Plan limited timber harvesting to 25% of the 1980s baseline rates (Ferris 2021). Because of the owl’s conservation status, the timber industry saw a decline in employment (by 28.1% from 1990 to 2000), and the states that are home to the Northern Spotted Owl declined in timber volume harvested by 44.6% (Ferris 2021). Today, the Northern Spotted Owl is still listed as a threatened species protected under the ESA. The maintenance of species and ecosystems is costly to industries, even if it only acts according to the law. 

Without constraints considering other species, natural resources, and land use, industries could incur a shortage of their products. Like in the timber industry, the fishing industry also must deal with constraints by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. However, the fishing industry’s biggest problem is overfishing, taking more fish from the marine population that can be replaced. Overfishing poses long-term losses in revenue as well as a loss in essential food sources. In a 2010 article titled Food security implications of global marine catch losses due to overfishing, the authors state, “By failing to safeguard the world’s ocean ecosystems, humankind is losing not only revenue from fisheries but also long-relied upon sources of nourishment and employment,” (Srinivasan 2010). One example of how overfishing can negatively impact a species is in 1884. The catches of the American cupped oyster were approximately 600,000 tons in the Chesapeake Bay alone, and it plummeted to about 230,000 tons for the entire Northeastern U.S. continental shelf in 1950 (Srinivasan 2010). Overfishing will cause fish populations to dwindle, which will cause many fishers to seek fish elsewhere. However, unfortunately, there are only so many places in the ocean where specific fish populations are found. Overfishing is threatening many marine species, but it is also taking away vital protein sources from smaller and impoverished countries. 

The timber and fishing industries directly impact the environment, leaving ecological footprints over-reaping their critical resources. Large countries like the United States experiences economic growth that is positively related to their ecological footprint. Its economic growth increases the use of fossil fuels rather than the use of greener alternative energy sources. So why is it important for companies to mitigate their ecological footprint? Because of technology’s current advancement, humans rely on mass amounts of limited resources on Earth. There is no way to create natural resources out of nothing, and there is no way to mine or harvest resources from outside of the planet. By mitigating their ecological footprint, companies can give vital ecosystems time to recuperate after being damaged. Unfortunately, many companies and countries today do not allow ecosystems to recover enough to be sustainable because of the increasing costs of maintaining biodiversity and ecosystems. 

Some countries, such as the U.S. and China, are experiencing economic growth. However, they are also experiencing massive growth in the use of fossil fuels, CO2 emissions, and overuse of other natural resources. In the 2019 article, The Impact of Natural Resources, Human Capital, and Foreign Direct Investment on the Ecological Footprint: The Case of the United States, researchers state: 

The U.S.’s gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is ranked eighth among 189 countries, and GDP is ranked first, but the U.S. economy is facing two critical issues: CO2 emissions and overuse of natural resources. In 2016, CO2 emissions in the U.S. were 5.01 million kilotons (kt), the second-largest in the world. Similarly, in 2016, the U.S. imported twenty of ninety mineral commodities from other countries. In spite of these imports, the US is the seventh-largest holder of natural resources in the world (Zafer 2019). 

While the U.S. is enjoying economic growth, it is at the expense of the environment, and not enough efforts are put towards becoming sustainable. The dependency on fossil fuels and lack of alternative energy infrastructure is a problem for the sustainability of the future U.S. and its economy. 

Today, many high-income countries often trade with low-income countries for natural resources. A 2021 article, Global Patterns of Ecologically Unequal Exchange: Implications for Sustainability in the 21st Century, found that high-income countries have an asymmetric exchange rate compared to low-income countries. High-income countries generate higher revenue for exporting resources than lower-income countries, and higher-income countries buy up the less expensive resources, creating market surpluses (Dorninger 2021). These unequal trade patterns hinder environmental sustainability growth and create more significant burdens for poorer countries (Dorninger 2021). In the 2021 article, C. Dorninger and co-authors state:

Because the economic growth model of industrialization requires the appropriation of resources from poorer regions, it seems illusory for all poorer nations to be able to ‘catch-up’ by – among other things – accessing even poorer regions from which to appropriate resources. Industrialization as experienced by the world’s wealthiest countries, and some emerging economies like China, cannot become universal. Economic theory must better acknowledge the material aspects of economic flows in order to be able to understand the holistic relationship between economic growth, international trade, and today’s global sustainability challenges (Dorninger 2021). 

Because of this inequality, it is difficult for poorer countries to advance to the financial state of high-income countries. This burden also makes it challenging to become sustainable for the environment. 

Environmentalism can be challenging to businesses and can cause a hindrance to economic growth. Government regulations can significantly reduce the output and unemployment in industries to protect specific plants and animals. However, a lack of government regulation can cause severe adverse effects on other species’ populations. Problems like overfishing and overharvesting will hurt the future of the world’s economy if not enough time allows the Earth to replenish. In a more immediate problem, there is a growing gap between high-income countries and low-income countries because of the asymmetric trade rates between the two. Suppose this asymmetric trade rate is not resolved. In that case, high-income countries will continue to overuse natural resources to the point of depletion. Low-income countries will become poorer and poorer, and they will not be able to grow economically.