DETUROPE - The Central European Journal of Regional Development and Tourism 2021, 13(1):24-38 | DOI: 10.32725/det.2021.002

Calculations on Ecological Footprint as a tool for land use planning and development on V4 countries

Somaya Aboelnagaa, Tamás Tóthb, György Iván Neszmélyic
a Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Hungary; Lecturer Assistant, Urban Regional Development Dep., Faculty of Urban and Regional Planning, Cairo University, Egypt
b Institute of Sustainable Economy, Kodolányi János University, 1139 Budapest, Frangepán str. 50-56. Hungary
c Institute of Commerce, Budapest Business School-University of Applied Sciences, 1155 Budapest, Markó str. 29-31, Hungary

Land use plan is a fundamental pillar for shaping the future of urban development plans to deal with national and regional issues. There is a merger between land use objectives as a resource and general development objectives to define clearly the importance of a developmental system for comprehensive land-use planning. Most regional plans do not follow integrated system of land-use planning without considering urban settlement in creating the vision and goals of their policies. As a result, most sectoral development plans are created in isolation without systematic consideration of standards and development tools of urban development. Consequently, this study attempts to use ecological footprint to evaluate regional land use in their current situation and in the stages of preparation of urban plans. Therefore, the comparison to human development index in order to figure out the stages clearly to use the proper land use planning approach, using an example of Visegrád countries.

Keywords: Ecological footprint, land use planning, regional approaches, Visegrád countries

Published: July 1, 2021  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Aboelnaga, S., Tóth, T., & Neszmélyi, G.I. (2021). Calculations on Ecological Footprint as a tool for land use planning and development on V4 countries. DETUROPE - The Central European Journal of Regional Development and Tourism, 13(1), 24-38. doi: 10.32725/det.2021.002
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Anielski, M., & Wilson, J. (2005). Ecological Footprints of Canadian Municipalities and Regions. The Canadian Federation of Canadian Municipalities. Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Anielski Management Inc.
    2. Borucke, M., & et al. (2011). The National Footprint Accounts. USA: Global Footprint Network.
    3. Collins A. (2017). Ecological footprint, in the International Encyclopedia of Geography: People, the Earth, Environment, and Technology, edited by Douglas Richardson, et al. Oxford, UK: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd. Pages: 1606-1608. Go to original source...
    4. Ecological Footprint Atlas (2009). Ecological Footprint Atlas. Global Footprint Network, Research And Standards Department.
    5. EJOLT. (2012). ecological-footprint. Retrieved 02 12, 2013, from ejolt: http://www.ejolt.org/ecological-footprint
    6. European Commission (2015). Final Impact Assessment. Retrieved 9 20, 2015, from European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/ia_carried_out/cia_2012_en.htm
    7. Ewing, B., Reed, A., Galli, A., Kitzes, J., & Wackernagel, M. (2010). calculation methodology for the national Footprint accounts, 2010 EditIon. Oakland, CA: Global Footprint Network.
    8. Global Footprint Network. (April 2010). The Ecological Wealth of Nations. Oakland, California, USA: Global Footprint Network.
    9. Global Footprint Network. (2012, October 12). Global Footprint Network. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from Global Footprint Network: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/glossary/
    10. GreenFacts. (2012). GreenFacts Scientific Board. Retrieved May 7, 2015, from GreenFacts: http://www.greenfacts.org/glossary/abc/biocapacity.htm
    11. Goodall, B. (1987). Dictionary of Human Geography. England: Penguin Books.
    12. Ira, V. (2001). Social, economic and environmental dimension of sustainable development in protected areas. Ekologia (Bratislava). Vol. 20, Supplement 3/2001, p. 205-316.
    13. Lenzen, M., & Murray, S. A. (2003). The Ecological Footprint - Issues and Trends, Sydney: The University of Sydney.
    14. Maguire, C; Best; Aaron; Giljum, S; Simmons, C; Blobel, D; Lewis, K; Hammer, M; Cavalieri, S; and Lutter, S (2008). Potential of the Ecological Footprint for monitoring environmental impacts from natural resource use. European Commission, DG Environment.
    15. United Nations Secretariat (2000). International Classification of Activities for Time Use Statistics, Expert Group Meeting on Methods for Conducting Time-Use Surveys, 23-27 October 2000, New York.
    16. Vasa, L., Angeloska, A., Trendov, N. (2018). Comparative analysis of circular agriculture development in selected Western Balkan countries based on sustainable performance indicators. Economic Annals-XXI 168 (11-12) pp. 44-47. Go to original source...
    17. Wackernagel and Rees. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint. In M. Wackernagel, & W. E. Rees, Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on The Earth (p. 164). Canada: New Society Publisher.
    18. Young, H. (2009). Centre for Environmental Management,Land use and biodiversity relationships. United Kingdom: School of Geography, University of Nottingham, Nottingham.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content