Material Footprint Assessment in a Global Input‐Output Framework

152 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Growth in Environmental Footprints and Environmental Impacts Embodied in Trade: Resource Efficiency Indicators from EXIOBASE3 (2018, background): “The main underlying driver for this huge increase is the significant investment in infrastructure, which emerging economies such as China are currently undertaking (Wang et al. 2014; Giljum et al. 2015; UNEP 2016; Minx et al. 2011).”
Spatially explicit assessment of water embodied in European trade: A product-level multi-regional input-output analysis (2016, methodology): “These models have been applied already in various studies for a number of environmental issues, including material use (Bruckner et al. 2012; Wiedmann et al. 2013; Giljum et al. 2015) and greenhouse gas emissions (e.g. Peters et al. 2012; Peters et al. 2011; Cranston and Hammond 2012).”
A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights (2020, background): “A study ofOECD countries covering 1999–2012 found that GHG emissions were constant while GDP grew on considerably (Gupta 2015).”
Material Flow Accounting: Measuring Global Material Use for Sustainable Development (2017, background): “In recent years several global assessments have become available, providing robust results for MF indicators (63, 66, 67, 102).”