Research article Topical Sections

Factors that affect the ecological footprint depending on the different income levels

  • The ecological footprint provides a method for measuring how much lands can support the consumption of the natural resources. Development and biocapacity debates revolve mainly around the factors that affect the ecological footprint and the approaches to improve the environmental quality. Therefore, we conducted the panel analysis of data for 99 countries from 1981 to 2006 to determine what factors affect the ecological footprint. The empirical results show that the effect of GDP per capita on the ecological footprint varies for different income levels. The effect of urbanization is significantly positive across income levels, which means that the higher the rate of urbanization in high or low income country, the higher the ecological footprint. As developing countries pursue economic development, there will be an impact on the environment. The developed countries may seek to develop their economies through activities that are more detrimental to the environment. Additionally, the export of goods and services divided by GDP is significant, which means that the higher the volume of exports, the greater the burden on the environment. However, this effect is not significant across different income level models. The income effect may explain the diverse effects of export on the environment. Therefore, panel data analysis and income classification are necessary to discuss the effect of export on the environment.

    Citation: Sheng-Tung Chen, Hui-Ting Chang. Factors that affect the ecological footprint depending on the different income levels[J]. AIMS Energy, 2016, 4(4): 557-573. doi: 10.3934/energy.2016.4.557

    Related Papers:

    [1] McKenna S. Vininski, Sunanda Rajput, Nicholas J. Hobbs, Joseph J. Dolence . Understanding sex differences in the allergic immune response to food. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2022, 6(3): 90-105. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2022009
    [2] Lucie Mondoulet, Sophie Wavrin, Vincent Dioszeghy, Véronique Dhelft, Emilie Puteaux, Mélanie Ligouis, Camille Plaquet, Christophe Dupont, Pierre-Henri Benhamou . No impact of filaggrin deficiency on the efficacy of epicutaneous immunotherapy in a murine model. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2017, 1(1): 1-14. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2017.1.1
    [3] Moufag Mohammed Saeed Tayeb . Role of IgG food test in patients with allergic diseases. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2023, 7(2): 154-163. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2023010
    [4] Amolak S Bansal, Alex Nicholas, Nazira Sumar, Veronica Varney . Mast cells, mediators, and symptomatic activation. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2024, 8(1): 34-55. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2024004
    [5] Seda Çevik, Uğur Altaş, Zeynep Meva Altaş, Mehmet Yaşar Özkars . Investigation of clinical characteristics of children with food allergy and factors associated with tolerance development. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2025, 9(2): 98-107. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2025007
    [6] Anna Fusco, Logan Pucci, Kevin Pierre, Adam Wolberg, Coulter Small, John Cerillo, Mohammad Reza Hosseini Siyanaki, Brandon Lucke-Wold . Contrast allergies for neurological imaging: When to proceed. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2022, 6(4): 216-227. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2022016
    [7] Shkar Rzgar K. Rostam, Khattab Ahmed Mustafa Shekhany, Harem Othman Smail . Prevalence of common food allergies in Erbil Province, Kurdistan Region of Iraq. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2020, 4(4): 117-127. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2020010
    [8] Yanru Guo, Rong Sun, Wei Li, Zhaohua Liu . Establishment of a basophil activation test in BN rats. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2020, 4(2): 20-31. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2020003
    [9] Xiujuan Li, Jianmin Lin, Yan Li, Min Zhu, Minchuan Lin, Chenxi Li . Inhalation allergen sensitization patterns in children with allergic rhinitis and asthma. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2024, 8(4): 254-264. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2024015
    [10] Gianna Moscato, Gianni Pala . Occupational allergy to food-derived allergens. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2017, 1(1): 21-30. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2017.1.21
  • The ecological footprint provides a method for measuring how much lands can support the consumption of the natural resources. Development and biocapacity debates revolve mainly around the factors that affect the ecological footprint and the approaches to improve the environmental quality. Therefore, we conducted the panel analysis of data for 99 countries from 1981 to 2006 to determine what factors affect the ecological footprint. The empirical results show that the effect of GDP per capita on the ecological footprint varies for different income levels. The effect of urbanization is significantly positive across income levels, which means that the higher the rate of urbanization in high or low income country, the higher the ecological footprint. As developing countries pursue economic development, there will be an impact on the environment. The developed countries may seek to develop their economies through activities that are more detrimental to the environment. Additionally, the export of goods and services divided by GDP is significant, which means that the higher the volume of exports, the greater the burden on the environment. However, this effect is not significant across different income level models. The income effect may explain the diverse effects of export on the environment. Therefore, panel data analysis and income classification are necessary to discuss the effect of export on the environment.


    The rate of obesity has risen substantially in the last three decades, culminating in approximately 40% of adults and 19% of children in the United States being obese in a recent study [1]. The prevalence of peanut (PN) allergy is also increasing rapidly [2]. The rate in which this disease has expanded over the past two decades outpaces what can be explained solely by genetics, suggesting a strong role for environmental factors. The Western diet, a diet characterized by an overindulgence of low-fiber foods rich in saturated fat, salt, refined sugars, coupled with reduced consumption of nutrient-rich foods, such as fruits and vegetables, has been implicated as a reason for the increased incidence of allergies [3][5]. Eating a Western diet has been shown to impact the microbial communities in our guts, leading to a decrease in microbial diversity and disruption in normal host-microbe interactions [6][14]. Furthermore, studies using mouse models have shown that the gut microbiomes function to induce tolerance to food allergens, including PN, and alterations in the microbial flora lead to allergic sensitization [15],[16]. Collectively, these findings suggest a connection between consuming a Western diet and increasing prevalence of food allergies. In support, a recent study showed that feeding mice a high-fat diet promoted the development of allergy to a model antigen ovalbumin (OVA) [5]. Still unclear, however, is the impact diet has on PN allergy. Therefore, the goal of this study was to examine whether eating a high-fat diet promotes the development of PN allergy.

    To accomplish this, we fed mice either a chow containing 45% fat (high-fat diet or HFD) or a control chow with 10% fat (low-fat diet or LFD). Once obesity was established, both cohorts of mice were exposed to PN using our established inhalation model [17]. To quantify allergic sensitization to PN, serum was tested for the presence of PN-specific antibodies and mice were challenged with PN to induce anaphylaxis. Using these approaches, we identified that mice fed a high fat diet developed higher serum levels of PN-specific IgE and stronger anaphylactic reactions. These data suggest that eating a HFD enhances the ability of immune cells to mount an allergic response to PN.

    Three-week old female BALB/c mice were obtained from The Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME) and placed on either a high-fat diet (HFD) to induce obesity or a control low-fat diet (LFD) (described in more detail below—see section 2.2). Male mice were not used in these experiments. Mice were housed in standard pathogen-free conditions under ad libitum feeding conditions. Mice exposed to PBS or PN were marked individually (e.g. LFD PBS-1, LFD PBS-2, LFD PN-1, HFD PBS-1, HFD PN-1, etc.) randomly on the day of retroorbitally bleeding (day 27) with a marker on their tails, and these identification markings allowed for the monitoring of rectal temperature and tracking mouse behavior following challenge with PN the next day (day 28).

    Mice were split into two cohorts and either fed a HFD (45% energy by fat) or a standard LFD (10% energy by fat) for at least 29 weeks to establish diet-induced obese BALB/c mice (see Figure 2a for experimental schematic). Diets were purchased from Research Diets, Inc. (New Brunswick, NJ) and specifics about the diets can be found in Table 1. Mice were weighed weekly to track that mice fed HFD displayed significant increase in body weight, and blood was collected retroorbitally at 8- and 15-week intervals to test plasma leptin levels with ELISA (described below). Weight and leptin levels were metrics used to document that mice fed HFD have established obesity compared to mice fed standard LFD. Following induction of diet-induced obesity, mice were exposed to PN by inhalation as described below—see section 2.4.

    Table 1.  Ingredient formulation of low-fat diet (LFD) and high-fat diet used in study.
    Macronutrient Ingredient LFD (control)* (g) HFD** (g)
    Protein Casein, lactic, 30 mesh 200.0 200.0
    Protein Cystine, L 3.0 3.0
    Carbohydrate Sucrose, fine granulated 354.0 176.8
    Carbohydrate Starch, corn 315.0 72.8
    Carbohydrate Lodex 10 (maltodextrin) 35.0 100.0
    Fat Soybean oil, USP 25.0 25.0
    Fat Lard 20.0 177.5

    * LFD was purchased for study from Research Diets, Inc. (D12450B). Caloric information broken down by % Kcal for LFD: protein—20% Kcal, fat—10% Kcal, Carbohydrate—70% Kcal. The energy density for LFD: 3.82 Kcal/g.

    ** HFD was purchased for study from Research Diets, Inc. (D12451). Caloric information broken down by % Kcal for HFD: protein—20% Kcal, fat—45% Kcal, Carbohydrate—35% Kcal. The energy density for HFD: 4.7 Kcal/g.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Peanut (PN) flour was purchased from the Golden Peanut Company (Alpharetta, GA). We tested endotoxin levels in the flour by Limulus Amebocyte Lysate assay (Lonza, Walkersville, MD) and found undetectable levels (<0.5 EU/mg flour). Crude PN extract was purchased from Greer Laboratories (Lenoir, NC) for intraperitoneal challenge.

    Naïve BALB/c mice fed either HFD to induce obesity or LFD as control were sensitized with PN flour as we have described previously [17]. In each experiment, mice were split into four groups: LFD PBS, LFD PN, HFD PBS, and HFD PN. In total across two experiments, 5 mice were in each PBS group, 6 mice were in the LFD PN group, and 8 mice were in the HFD PN group. Briefly, mice were exposed to either 100 µg peanut flour in 50 µL PBS or PBS alone twice per week for 4 weeks. On day 27, mice were retroorbitally bled to determine serum levels of PN-specific IgE and IgG1. The next day (day 28), mice were challenged with 2.5 mg PN peanut extract in 500 µL PBS via intraperitoneal injection to induce anaphylactic reaction. Rectal temperature and clinical symptoms were monitored before (0 min) and after PN challenge (every 10 min for 1 h). Rectal temperatures were recorded with an electronic thermometer (Oakton Instruments, Vernon Hills, Ill) equipped with a RET-3 rectal probe (Physitemp Instruments, Clifton, NJ). Clinical symptoms were scored based on the following published criteria [18]: 0, no symptoms; 1, scratching of ear and mouth; 2, puffiness around eyes and mouth, pilar erection, labored breathing; 3, prolonged period of motionlessness; 4, severely reduced motility, tremors, severe respiratory distress; and 5, death.

    Serum levels of PN-specific IgE and IgG1 were measured by ELISA as previously described [17]. Leptin was measured in plasma samples using a commercial mouse leptin sandwich ELISA kit (R&D Systems, Minneapolis, MN) according to manufacturer instructions.

    All animal experimental protocols and procedures were carried out with the approval of the Mayo Clinic Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee under IACUC protocol number A38914.

    Differences between the various treatment groups were deemed statistically significant using a Student t test, with p ≤ 0.05 considered statistically significant. Numerical data are presented as mean ± SEM. Error bars within figures represent SEM.

    The goal of this study was to investigate whether obesity increases the susceptibility of developing PN allergy. Beginning at 3 weeks of age, BALB/c female mice were fed either a HFD to induce obesity or a control and standard LFD for at least 29 weeks prior to PN exposure. After 16 weeks of feeding a HFD, mice typically exhibit a 20–30% increase in body weight, along with other signs of obesity (e.g. adipocyte hyperplasia, mesenteric fat deposition, increased fat mass, diabetes, and hypertension) compared to mice fed control chow [19],[20]. Similar to these published findings, starting after 15 weeks of eating the HFD chow, mice in our study displayed a significant increase in weight when compared to their LFD chow fed counterparts (Week 15 HFD: 24.32 ± 0.75 g; Week 15 LFD: 22.58 ± 0.39, p = 0.046 (Figure 1a). Mice fed HFD exhibited 7.82% weight gain by week 16, and from weeks 19–31, consistently showed a 10–13% higher body weight as compared to LFD-fed mice (Figure 1b). These findings are consistent with BALB/c mice being more resistant to HFD induced obesity than other mouse strains [19]. To further verify our model, leptin levels, which are known to be elevated in obese mice fed HFD [21],[22], were measured in plasma at 8 and 15 weeks after feeding commenced (Figure 1c). As obesity develops, plasma leptin levels are known to increase [23]. Mice fed HFD exhibited higher leptin levels at both time points (Week 8 LFD: 2316 ± 232 pg/mL; Week 8 HFD: 3324 ± 329 pg/mL, p = 0.023; Week 15 LFD: 2468 ± 213 pg/mL; Week 15 HFD: 5549 ± 1527 pg/mL, p = 0.063). Collectively, these data strongly support that we developed diet-induced obese and appropriate control mice necessary to examine how diet impacts sensitization to PN.

    Figure 1.  Establishment of a mouse model of diet-induced obesity. (a) Mice were fed with either high fat (45% energy by fat) or a standard, low fat (10% energy by fat) diet for at least 29 weeks to establish obese or control mice prior to sensitization to peanut (PN) via inhalation. Mice were weighed weekly and their weights are reported in grams. Data represents a mean ± SEM of 24 mice per a diet group. (b) Percent increase in weight of mice fed HFD as compared to mice fed LFD. Data are shown starting 3 weeks after diet commenced and is recorded weekly through week 31. (c) Leptin plasma levels were measured after 8 and 15 weeks via ELISA. Data is the mean ± SEM of 9 of the 24 mice per diet group randomly selected to test for leptin levels in plasma. For both (a) and (c), * p < 0.05 compared to control mice fed LFD, unless indicated otherwise.

    HFD and LFD control mice were sensitized to PN using our 4-week inhalation model (Figure 2a) [17]. Briefly, mice were exposed to PN flour (or PBS vehicle) twice per week for 4 weeks. On day 27, blood was collected to analyze the presence of PN-specific antibodies. Regardless of diet, mice exposed to PN produced PN-specific IgE and IgG1 responses (Figure 2b,c). Strikingly, HFD mice developed 3.5-fold higher titers of PN-specific IgE following PN inhalation than their LFD PN counterparts (OD450 HFD PN: 0.648 ± 0.153; OD450 LFD PN: 0.183 ± 0.021, p = 0.024). In contrast, such differences were not observed in the development of PN-specific IgG1 (Figure 2b,c).

    Figure 2.  Mice fed HFD produce significantly higher PN-specific IgE than those fed LFD. (a) Schematic showing timeline of experiment. Mice were fed starting at 3 weeks of age and fed for 29+ weeks (** one group of mice was fed for 29 weeks and the other group of mice were fed for 56 weeks, so the mice were 8–14 months of age at the time of sensitization by exposure to PN flour). (b) Levels of PN-specific antibodies in d27 sera were measured by ELISA. Data are pooled from 2 experiments and represented as a mean ± SEM (n = 5 in each PBS group, 6–8 mice in each PN group). (c) Scatter plots showing PN-specific antibody levels of each mouse are shown. For both (b) and (c), * reveals significance (p < 0.05) between LFD PBS and LFD PN groups, ^ indicates significance (p < 0.05) between HFD PBS and HFD PN, and # depicts significance (p < 0.05) between LFD PN and HFD PN.

    On day 28, mice were challenged intraperitoneally with PN extract to elicit an anaphylactic reaction. To track the progress of anaphylaxis, rectal temperatures and clinical scores were monitored every 10 min for 1 h following PN challenge. Both LFD and HFD mice sensitized to PN underwent anaphylaxis (Figure 3). Not surprisingly, PBS-sensitized mice did not react to PN challenge. Interestingly, HFD mice underwent a more severe anaphylactic reaction when compared to LFD control mice. Thirty minutes post-challenge, PN-sensitized HFD mice displayed a larger drop in rectal temperature (HFD PN: 36.4 ± 0.4 °C; LFD PN: 37.9 ± 0.4 °C, p = 0.029) and higher clinical score (HFD PN: 2.4 ± 0.2; LFD PN: 1.5 ± 0.2, p = 0.01) compared to LFD control mice sensitized with PN (Figure 3). Clinical scores of PN-exposed HFD mice remained significantly higher than LFD PN at the 40-minute time point. Overall, these data suggest that HFD mice sensitized to PN develop the symptoms of systemic anaphylaxis (i.e. drop in body temperature and presence of clinical signs) faster and more severely than LFD PN mice following challenge with PN.

    Figure 3.  Mice fed HFD undergo more severe anaphylactic reactions upon PN challenge than LFD-fed counterparts. To track anaphylaxis to PN in mice, rectal temperature (a) and clinical scores (b) were recorded for 60 min following intraperitoneal injection with peanut extract on day 28. Additional description of clinical score values can be found in the materials and methods section. Data are pooled from 2 experiments and represent mean ± SEM (n = 5 in each PBS group, 6–8 mice in each PN group). * reveals significance (p < 0.05) between LFD PBS and LFD PN groups, ^ indicates significance (p < 0.05) between HFD PBS and HFD PN, and # depicts significance (p < 0.05) between LFD PN and HFD PN.

    A recent study has suggested that feeding mice a HFD promotes allergic sensitization to a model antigen OVA likely through diet-induced changes to the gut microflora [5]. Since alterations in the gut microbiome has been linked to sensitization to PN [16], we wondered what impact diet had on the development of PN allergy. To address this question, we used a straightforward approach to first develop diet-induced obese mice, along with control chow fed mice, and second, expose these mice to PN via our inhalation model [17]. We found that mice that consumed HFD developed higher titers of PN-specific IgE. The anaphylactic reactions following PN challenge were more severe than their control chow fed counterparts. These data suggest that eating HFD creates an inflammatory environment that promotes developing allergic immune responses to PN. Furthermore, these data provide additional evidence that supports the notion that eating HFD, the diet commonly associated with a Western lifestyle, is one of the reasons for an increased prevalence of allergies [3][5].

    It has been reported previously that the gut microbiota changes after consuming HFD [6][14]. Microbial diversity declines and host-microbe interactions are altered. It is also known that macrophages are activated by HFD. In obese mice, macrophages accumulate in adipose tissue where they participate in driving inflammation through the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines [24],[25]. Obesity also induced mast cells and eosinophils to accumulate in the trachea and lung in an eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) mouse model [26]. Therefore, eating a high fat diet itself may induce these cellular changes in the airways, resulting in development of EoE [26]. In another study, HFD-fed female mice presented higher numbers of leukocytes in the lung tissue, attributed to higher numbers of neutrophils, macrophages, and eosinophils verses standard chow female mice [27]. While much remains to be learned about the consequences of obesity-linked cellular accumulation in the airways, these data would suggest that the increase in adipose tissue leads to an increase in inflammatory cells in the airway capable of responding to airway allergens. In agreement, genetically obese (ob/ob, db/db, and Cpefat) mice developed greater allergic responses due to inhalation of ozone, a common environmental pollutant and asthma inducer, than lean mice [28]. The susceptibility of genetically obese mice to developing PN allergy has been unknown.

    While mice fed HFD displayed significantly higher levels of PN-specific IgE, no difference was observed in IgG1 titers. Intraperitoneal challenge may result in IgG1-mediated anaphylactic response via FcγRIII-expressing cells [29]. This is especially observed in IgE-deficient mice [29]. Although LFD PN mice in this study developed a significant PN-specific IgE response, the magnitude of responses was lower than we previously observed using the inhalation model [17]. Therefore, it remains possible that we failed to observe striking difference in the anaphylactic responses between HFD PN and LFD PN mice following PN challenge because IgG1 may also induce anaphylactic response in LFD PN mice. Due to lower IgE, the IgG1-mediated reaction could have been more fully manifested following challenge with PN in LFD PN mice. This finding would be consistent with data that shows both IgG1 and IgE have to be absent to fully abrogate peanut-induced anaphylaxis [29]. Future studies should examine whether in the absence of IgG1 antibody responses, more pronounced differences can be observed between LFD and HFD mice.

    The specific mechanism for how HFD stimulates a more robust immune response to PN than LFD remains unclear. Recently, we have shown that a type 2 cytokine IL-13, which is secreted rapidly by group 2 innate lymphoid cells (ILC2s) following exposure to PN, is critical to drive the development of T follicular helper (Tfh) cells and production of PN-specific IgE [30]. In the same study, we also showed that IL-1α alone could induce IL-13 production from ILC2s and that the release of IL-13 caused by exposure to PN was dependent on IL-1R1 (the receptor for IL-1α and IL-1β). Furthermore, we have shown that signaling through IL-1R1 is necessary for sensitization to PN [17]. Therefore, future studies should examine whether HFD increases the presence of cells capable of secreting IL-1α into the environment to promote IL-13 production by ILC2s. Indeed, alveolar macrophages are a potential cellular source of IL-1α as they have been shown to generate IL-1α in response to inhaled fine particles [31]. Notably, mice fed HFD displayed significant increases in alveolar macrophages [32]. In agreement with the findings we describe herein, the study also showed that mice fed HFD exhibited a greater allergic response to house dust mite than control chow fed mice [32]. Taken together, it is reasonable to speculate that HFD affects one or more of the members of the immune pathway, such as alveolar macrophages, IL-1α, ILC2s, IL-13, or Tfh cells, that lead to allergic sensitization to PN via inhalation. Future studies will need to pinpoint which members of the pathway are modulated by HFD.

    While obesity is well known to be linked to an increased prevalence of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes, its impact on lung diseases is also well documented. Obesity is a well-known risk factor for asthma, obstructive sleep apnea, obesity hypoventilation syndrome, pulmonary hypertension, as well as affecting outcomes in acute respiratory distress syndrome and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [33]. Obesity leads to a constant state of low-grade inflammation in pro-inflammatory macrophages that have been shown to reach up to 50% of the cellularity of subcutaneous adipose tissue in obese individuals [24],[34]. In addition, obese humans and mice have been shown to display increases in mast cells in their adipose tissue [35]. Given their role as a key player in allergic responses, these data suggest that mast cells may also play a critical role in establishing the immune environment necessary to make obese individuals more susceptible to airway diseases.

    We have shown previously that PN exposure through the airways elicited PN sensitization in mice, which develop systemic anaphylaxis upon PN challenge [17]. Moreover, the majority of PN-allergic children experience their first allergic reaction to PN upon first ingestion of PN [36]. The Learning Early About Peanut Allergy (LEAP) study showed early introduction of PN into the diet prevented the development of clinical PN allergy among children at high risk [37], suggesting early oral exposure may induce tolerance. Strikingly, a greater percentage of children in LEAP's PN avoidance group developed elevated titers of PN-specific IgE antibody, suggesting sensitization to non-oral environmental PN allergens [37]. PN is readily detectable in household dust and has recently been shown to promote airway sensitization to PN in mice [38][40]. Our increased knowledge about the immunological relevance of dust to PN allergy coupled with the growing belief that young children should be orally consume PN in order to drive tolerance, strongly supports further examination of immunological pathways driving inhalation-mediated PN sensitization. Our study accomplished this task by showing that obesity linked to eating a HFD made mice more susceptible to developing allergic response to PN via the airways. Future studies will elucidate the mechanism of the response itself, but this knowledge is critical to advance our growing understanding of the immunology of PN allergy.

    This project showed that mice fed high-fat diet and were sensitized to PN allergen generated significantly more PN-specific IgE and underwent more severe anaphylaxis upon PN challenge than low-fat diet fed counterparts, suggesting eating a high-fat diet promotes an immune environment more supportive to the development of PN allergy.

    [1] Ott WR (1978) Environmental Indices—theory and practice. Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI, 371.
    [2] Patil GP, Rao CR (1993) Multivariate environmental statistics. North-Holland Series in Statistics and Probability, North-Holland, New York, 596.
    [3] Gary RS (2000) A generalized environmental sustainability index for agricultural systems. Agr, Ecosyst Environ 79: 29-41. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(99)00147-4
    [4] Sheldon I (2006) Trade and Environmental Policy: A Race to the Bottom? J Agr Econ 57: 365-392. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-9552.2006.00056.x
    [5] Ulph A (1997) International Trade and the Environment: A Survey of Recent Economic Analysis. in Folmer H and Tietenberg T (eds), International Handbook of Environmental and Resource Economics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 205-242.
    [6] Wackernagel M, Rees W (1996) Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the Earth. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada.
    [7] Binningsbo H, de Soya I, Gleditsch N (2007) Green giant or straw man? Environmental pressure and civil conflict, 1961–1999. Popul Environ 28: 337-353.
    [8] Grazi JC, van den Bergh JM, Reitveld P (2007) Spatial welfare economics versus ecological footprint: Modeling agglomeration, externalities and trade. Environ Resource Econ 38: 135-153.
    [9] Levett R (1998) Footprinting: a great step forward, but tread carefully—A response to Mathis Wackernagel. Local Environ 3: 67-74.
    [10] van den Bergh JCJM, Verbruggen H (1999) Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the ecological footprint. Ecol Econ 29: 61-72.
    [11] Ayres RU (2000) Commentary on the utility of the ecological footprint concept. Ecol Econ 32: 347-349.
    [12] Costanza R (2000) The dynamics of the ecological footprint concept. Ecol Econ 32: 341-345. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00150-0
    [13] van Kooten GC, Bulte EH (2000) The ecological footprint: useful science or politics? Ecol Econ 32: 385-389. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(99)00160-3
    [14] Opschoor H (2000) The ecological footprint: measuring rod or metaphor? Ecol Econ 32: 363-367.
    [15] Lenzen M, Murray SA (2001) Amodified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecol Econ 37: 229-255.
    [16] Ferng JJ (2002) Toward a scenario analysis framework for energy footprints. Ecol Econ 40: 53-69. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(01)00270-1
    [17] Jorgensen AE, Vigsoe D, Krisoffersen A, et al., Assessing the ecological footprint. A look at the WWF’s Living Planet Report 2002. Institute for Miljovurdering, Kobenhavn, Denmark, 2002.
    [18] Bergesen A, Bartley T (2000) World-System and Ecosystem. J World Syst Res 3: 364-368.
    [19] Bunker SG, Underdeveloping the Amazon: Extraction, Unequal Exchange, and the Failure of the Modern State. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1985.
    [20] Burns TJ, Davis BL, Jorgenson AK, et al., Assessing the Short- and Long-Term Impacts of Environmental Degradation on Social and Economic Outcomes. Presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, August, Anaheim, CA, 2001.
    [21] Clapp J (2002) The Distancing of Waste: Overconsumption in a Global Economy. In Confronting Consumption, Princen T, Maniates MF and Conca K (Eds.) Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 155-176.
    [22] Hornborg A, The Power of the Machine: Global Inequalities of Economy, Technology, and Environment. Alta Mira Press, Walnut Creek, California, USA, 2001.
    [23] Jorgensen AK, Burns TJ (2003) Globalization, the Environment, and Infant Mortality: A Cross-National Study. Humboldt J Soc Rel 28: 7-25.
    [24] Tucker R (2002) Environmentally Damaging Consumption: The Impact of American Markets on Tropical Ecosystems in the Twentieth Century. In Confronting Consumption, Princen T, Maniates MF and Conca, K (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 177-196.
    [25] Moran DD, Wackernagel M, Kitzes JA, et al. (2008) Measuring sustainable development –nation by nation. Ecol Econ 64: 470-474.
    [26] Jorgensen AK (2003) Consumption and environmental degradation: a cross national analysis of the ecological footprint. Soc Prob 50: 374-394. doi: 10.1525/sp.2003.50.3.374
    [27] Li XM, Xiao RB, Yuan SH, et al. (2009) Urban total ecological footprint forecasting by using radial basis function neural network: A case study of Wuhan city, China. Ecol Indic 10: 241-248.
    [28] Jorgenson AK, Clark B, Kentor J (2010) Militarization and the environment: a panel study of carbon dioxide emissions and the ecological footprints of nations 1970-2000. Global Environ Polit 10: 7-29.
    [29] Jorgenson AK, Dick C, Mahutga MC (2007) Foreign investment dependence and the environment: An ecostructural approach. Soc Prob 54: 371-394. doi: 10.1525/sp.2007.54.3.371
    [30] Mostafa MM (2010) A Bayesian approach to analyzing the ecological footprint of 140 nations. Ecol Indic 10: 808-817. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.01.002
    [31] York R, Rosa EA, Dietz T (2003) Footprints on the earth: the environmental consequences of modernity. Am Sociol Rev 68: 279-300. doi: 10.2307/1519769
    [32] Jorgenson AK, Rice J (2005) Structural dynamics of international trade and material consumption: A cross-national study of the ecological footprints of less-developed countries. J World Syst Res 11: 57-77.
    [33] Grimes P, Kentor J (2003) Exporting the greenhouse: foreign capital penetration and CO2 emissions 1980–1996. J World Syst Res 9: 261-275.
    [34] Shandra JM, London B, Whooley O, et al. (2004) International Nongovernmental Organizations and Carbon Dioxide Emissions in the Developing World: A Quantitative, Cross-National Analysis. Sociol Inquiry 74: 520-545. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.2004.00103.x
    [35] Roberts JT, Grimes P, Manale J (2003) Social roots of global environmental change: A world systems analysis of carbon dioxide emissions. J World Syst Research 9: 277-315.
    [36] Global Footprint Network, 2009. Available from: http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/.
    [37] WDI, 2010. World Development Indicators. World Bank: Washington D.C., USA.
    [38] Kitzes J, Galli A, Rizk SM, et al. Guidebook to the National Footprint Accounts: 2008 Edition. Global Footprint Network, Oakland.
    [39] Ehrhardt-Martinez K (1998) Social determinants of deforestation in developing countries. Soc Force 77: 567-587.
    [40] Ehrhardt-Martinez K, Crenshaw EM, Jenkins GC (2002) Deforestation and the Environmental Kuznets Curve: a cross-national investigation of intervening mechanisms. Soc Sci Q 83: 226-243.
    [41] Kasarda J, Crenshaw EM (1991) Third world urbanization: dimensions, theories, and determinants. Annu Rev Sociol 17: 467-501. doi: 10.1146/annurev.so.17.080191.002343
    [42] Liddle B, Messinis G (2015) Which comes first urbanization or economic growth? Evidence from Heterogeneous Panel Causality Tests. Appl Econ Lett 22: 349-355.
    [43] Meijering E (2002) A chronology of interpolation from ancient astronomy to modern signal and image processing. P IEEE 90: 319-342. doi: 10.1109/5.993400
    [44] Hausman JA (1978) Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica 46: 1251-1271. doi: 10.2307/1913827
    [45] Liddle B (2015) What are the carbon emissions elasticities for income and population? Bridging STIRPAT and EKC via robust heterogeneous panel estimates. Global Environ Chang 31: 62-73.
    [46] Pesaran M, 2004. General Diagnostic Tests for Cross Section Dependence in Panels’ IZA Discussion Paper No. 1240.
    [47] Pesaran M (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econometrics 22: 265-312. doi: 10.1002/jae.951
    [48] van Vuuren DP, Smeets EMW (2000) Ecological footprints of Benin, Bhutan, Costa Rica and the Netherlands. Ecol Econ 34:115-130. doi: 10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00155-5
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Francesco Suriano, Elisabeth E. L. Nyström, Domenico Sergi, Jenny K. Gustafsson, Diet, microbiota, and the mucus layer: The guardians of our health, 2022, 13, 1664-3224, 10.3389/fimmu.2022.953196
    2. Ashraf A. Elgendy, Hatem Tallima, Dietary arachidonic acid contributes to alleviation of peanut-induced allergy biomarkers in BALB/c, C57BL/6 and CD-1 mice, 2025, 144, 15675769, 113661, 10.1016/j.intimp.2024.113661
    3. Kylie Jungles, Maryam Sharafkhah, Keerthi Bansal, Marjan Moallemian Isfahani, Nashmia Qamar, Sareh Eghtesad, Roya Kelishadi, Navid Danaei, Amir Houshang Mehrparvar, Hamid Hakimi, Hossein Poustchi, Mahboobeh Mahdavinia, Prevalence of food allergy and its association with atopic dermatitis in Iran: Results from the PERSIAN birth cohort, 2025, 4, 27728293, 100385, 10.1016/j.jacig.2024.100385
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2016 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(16436) PDF downloads(1876) Cited by(26)

Figures and Tables

Tables(7)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog