Abstract:
The ecological footprint is one of the important environmental impact indicator of
humanity’s demand for crop, forest, fishing grounds, grazing and built-up land as well as for the
area of land required to assimilate CO2 emissions and waste generated by human activities. This
indicator describes resource budget and environmental degradation of globe, a region, a nation
or a city in a given year. This study examined trends of ecological footprint, economic growth
and ecological efficiency of middle and high income countries. It also estimated the gap between
a country’s efficiency in resource utilization and maximum ecological efficiency of total
footprints and its components. Besides, inequality in the distribution of income, environmental
impact intensity (or ecological efficiency) and ecological footprint for the group of middle and
high income countries is also estimated. The study used the panel dataset for the period 2003-
2011 that covered 35 High and 77 Middle income countries. The data on the Ecological footprint
was obtained from Global Footprint Network. The Stochastic Impact by Regression on
Population, Affluence and Technology (STIRPAT) model was used as an analytical tool to
examine the effect of various driving forces on total ecological footprint, cropland, forest, fishing
grounds, grazing land, CO2 footprint and built-up land footprint. The Atkinson Index was used
as an analytical tool to examine inequality between High and Middle income countries in
distribution of income, footprints and environmental impact intensity. The findings revealed that
the high income countries used more ecological resources than their biocapacity as compared to
middle income countries. The ecological footprint, GDP per capita, ecological efficiency, fossil
fuel consumption, and level of urbanization and service intensity of high income countries are
larger than middle income countries. While population density, annual working hours, and
manufacturing and services intensity of high income countries are lower than middle income
countries. Similarly, the sampled countries have more potential in cropland, forest and grazing
land activities, followed by CO2 footprint, fishing grounds and built-up land footprint for
achieving maximum level of ecological efficiency.
The regression analysis of combined panel supports the environmental Kuznets Hypothesis
in case of total ecological footprint and its components. The separate panel model regression
analysis of high income countries supports the hypothesis in case of total ecological footprint,
fishery, and grazing and built-up land footprint. The results of middle income countries of total
ecological footprint, cropland, CO2 footprint and grazing land footprint support the hypothesis
that decoupling of economic growth accelerates environmental sustainability. The major driving
forces that contribute to increase in total ecological footprint are economic growth, population,
xiii
level of urbanization, fossil fuel consumption, export intensity and income inequality. Similarly,
a rise in economic growth, population, export and manufacturing intensity, working hours, coal,
oil and gas consumption increases CO2 footprint of the sample countries. However, further level
of economic development and education improve environmental quality by reducing cropland,
fishing grounds and forest footprint. The comparison of resource distribution through Atkinson
Index shows that high income countries have larger equality in footprint and environmental
impact intensity than middle income countries in case of grazing land, forest, fishing grounds
and built-up land.
It is suggested that both high and middle income countries should control ecological
overshooting. Investment in education is instrumental in reducing the ecological footprint. Rural
areas should be developed through creating job opportunities, agro-based business activities and
small scale industries which will reduce pressure on built-up land footprint. Production and use
of renewable energy alternatives such as wind, solar system and micro hydro power plants can
lessen the CO2 footprint and also leads toward environmental sustainability. The high and middle
income countries should prioritize the utilization efficiency of cropland, forest and grazing land.
The high income countries should reduce their footprint associated with forest, CO2, fishing
grounds and built-up land, because its average environmental impact intensity is greater than
their biocapacity. The middle income countries should reduce cropland and grazing land
footprint due to their larger mean environmental impact intensity than high income countries.