DEVELOPMENT

Figure 3.5.2
Estonia’s Ecological Footprint per capita, 1992–2008 (global hectares per capita)
Carbon Built-up area Fishing ground Forest Grazing land Cropland
7.5
7.5
7.0
7.0
6.5
6.5
6.0
6.0
5.5
5.5
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.2
2.5
2.2
1.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.5
0
0
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Source: Global Footprint Network 2012
The Ecological Footprint combines six indicators
related to people’s consumption of renewable natural
resources and their regeneration: food and fibres
produced from plants (cropland), food and products
produced from animals (grazing land), fish (fishing
ground), lumber and other forest products (forest),
land that accumulates and stores fossil carbon dioxide
(carbon sink) and land under buildings and structures
(built-up land).
The strength of the Ecological Footprint as an
indicator is considered to be the fact that it is possible
to use it to show whether humanity (or a country, city,
household) is within the regeneration limits of the ecosystem.
With the help of the Ecological Footprint, the
impact of various consumption habits on the Earth’s
ecosystem can be clearly explained. The Ecological
Footprint methodology is based on the belief that the
regeneration capability of the Earth will be the limiting
factor for human activity, if humanity’s overconsumption
continues.
On the other hand, the Ecological Footprint
methodology is also limited, because it does not show
economic relationships, or the consumption of non-renewable
natural resources. However, it is probably not
possible to use only one complex indicator to describe all
of the environmental impacts, so that various indicators
must be analysed (Galli et al. 2012).
3.5.2
Estonia’s position in the rankings of the
Ecological Footprint Index
The Ecological Footprint of the European countries,
including Estonia, is three to five times greater than that
of the developing countries. Although the consumption
of natural resources in Europe has not grown in the last
20 years, the import of natural resources and products
from other parts of the world has increased significantly,
which means that Europe has partly “exported” its
environmental impact (Galli et al, 2012). The majority
of Eastern European countries live within the regeneration
capability of their region, but on the global level,
this rate of consumption is not sustainable (Kitzes et
al., 2008). Based on a report concerning the Ecological
Footprint of 150 countries in the world, which is based
on 2008 data (Global Footprint Network 2012), Estonia
is in 26 th place, starting from the country with the largest
Footprint, and exceeds the global sustainability level
2.5 times. If we compare the Ecological Footprints with
the country’s economic levels, generally, a larger gross
domestic product (GDP) is accompanied by a larger
Ecological Footprint. When we compare the Ecological
Footprint and GDP in the European Union Member
States, Estonia stands out for its large Ecological Footprint
despite its smaller GDP (Figure 3.5.1 a, b).
140
Estonian Human Development Report 2012/2013