Main Article Content


Rapid urbanization in cities is crafting major environmental problems, leading to degradation of urban ecosystems and is responsible for creating an imbalance between demand and supply of resources. Ecological Footprint Analysis (EFA) is a tool that can be used to assess this imbalance scientifically and determine the sustainability of a particular area. Our study aims to determine the urban sustainability of Kangra district in Himachal Pradesh, a hilly state in North Western Himalayas, India situated in North western Himalayas by using one of the Ecological Footprint Analysis (EFA) components, the built-up land footprint, as a pragmatic tool for analysis and planning of the urban region. The total built-up land footprint, total biocapacity and total ecological deficit are 18146.095 g ha,15968.564 g ha and 2177.531 g ha respectively whereas built-up land footprint per capita, built-up land biocapacity per capita and ecological deficit per capita are 1.371 g ha, 1.206 g ha, and 0.164 g ha respectively in different urban areas. Consequently, it is concluded that the built-up land results in an ecological deficit, and the system is considered unsustainable because its ecological footprint exceeds its bio capacity. It is suggested that urban sustainability should move and work on ecological principles so that the vision encompassing global goals and agenda 2030 for sustainable development can be achieved.


Bio-capacity (BC) Built-up land Ecological deficit Ecological footprint analysis (EFA) Urbanization

Article Details

How to Cite
Rana, D., Bhardwaj, S., & Gourav. (2023). Assessment of environmental sustainability using ecological footprint in urban ecosystems of North Western Himalayas. Environment Conservation Journal, 24(4), 1–8.


  1. Borucke, M., Moore, D., Cranston, G., Gracey, K., Iha, K., Larson, J., & Galli, A. (2013). Accounting for demand and supply of the biosphere's regenerative capacity: The National Footprint Accounts’ underlying methodology and framework. Ecological indicators, 24, 518-533. DOI:
  2. Brundtland, G. H. (1987). Our common future—Call for action. Environmental conservation, 14(4), 291-294. DOI:
  3. Census of India, GOI. (2011). Size, Growth and distribution of population in India. Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, India,.
  4. Corrigan, M. B., Dunphy, R. T., Gabel, N. M., Levitt, R. L., McMahon, E. T., & Pawlukiewicz, M. (2004). Ten principles for Smart Growth on the suburban fringe.
  5. Čuček, L., Klemeš, J. J., & Kravanja, Z. (2012). A review of footprint analysis tools for monitoring impacts on sustainability. Journal of Cleaner Production, 34, 9-20. DOI:
  6. Dadashpoor, H., & Ahani, S. (2019). Land tenure-related conflicts in peri-urban areas: A review. Land Use Policy, 85, 218-229. DOI:
  7. Diamond, K. (2012). Ecological footprint accounting: measuring environmental supply and demand. on 2nd January 2022)
  8. Galli, A., Iha, K., Pires, S. M., Mancini, M. S., Alves, A., Zokai, G., ... & Wackernagel, M. (2019). Assessing the ecological footprint and biocapacity of Portuguese cities: Critical results for environmental awareness and local management. Cities, 96, 102442. DOI:
  9. Geng, Y. (2012). Toward safe treatment of municipal solid wastes in China’s urban areas. Environmental Science and Technology 46: 7067–7068. DOI:
  10. Lin, D., Hanscom, L., Murthy, A., Galli, A., Evans, M., Neill, E., & Wackernagel, M. (2019). Ecological footprint accounting for countries: updates and results of the National Footprint Accounts, 2012–2018. Resources, 7(3), 58. DOI:
  11. Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., Ulgiati, S., & Zhang, P. (2013). Measuring China's circular economy. Science, 339(6127), 1526-1527. DOI:
  12. Geng, Y., Zhang, L., Chen, X., Xue, B., Fujita, T., & Dong, H. (2014). Urban ecological footprint analysis: a comparative study between Shenyang in China and Kawasaki in Japan. Journal of cleaner production, 75, 130-142. DOI:
  13. Global Footprint Network (GFN) (2017). Annual report., accessed on Nov. 01, 2021.
  14. Jain, P., Singh, I., Jain, M., 2021. Urbanization and Land-Use change in the hill town of Nainital. Mater. Today Proc. DOI:
  15. Kandil, R. A., Sarhan, A. L. A. A., & Abdelgalil, R. E. (2019). Urban Ecological footprint analysis as an evaluation tool for sustainability: Analysis of the built-up land footprint of Alexandria city, Egypt. The Sustainable City, 238, 271-281. DOI:
  16. Kandil, R. A., Sarhan, A., & Abdel Galil, R. E. (2020). Analysis of ecological balance issue for the built-up land and cropland footprints in Alexandria city, Egypt during this time-series (2005-2019). International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 15(6), 911-920. DOI:
  17. Karkazis, J., & Boffey, B. (1997). Spatial organization of an industrial area: Distribution of the environmental cost and equity policies. European journal of operational research, 101(3), 430-441. DOI:
  18. Kassouri, Y. (2021). Monitoring the spatial spillover effects of urbanization on water, built-up land and ecological footprints in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of Environmental Management, 300, 113690. DOI:
  19. Lin, D., Hanscom, L., Martindill, J., Borucke, M., Cohen, L., Galli, A., & Wackernagel, M. (2019). Working guidebook to the national footprint and biocapacity accounts. Global Footprint Network: Oakland, CA, USA.
  20. Livingston, A. (2017). What is Smart Growth – Urban Planning Principles, Benefits and Examples. (Accessed on Nov. 01, 2021).
  21. Minea, E. M. (2008). Overview on urban development through urban planning principles. Transylvanian Review of Administrative Sciences, 4(24), 77-86.
  22. Monfreda, C., Wackernagel, M., & Deumling, D. (2004). Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity assessments. Land use policy, 21(3), 231-246. DOI:
  23. National Footprint Accounts (NFA) Annual reports, (2011). Global Footprint Network.https://www.footprint, accessed on Nov. 30, 2021.
  24. National Footprint Accounts (NFA) Annual reports, for the year of 2005 - 2017. Global Footprint Network., accessed on Nov. 29, 2021.
  25. National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts, 2021 Edition Downloaded 2020-11 -18 from
  26. Newman, P. (2006). The environmental impact of cities. Environment and Urbanization, 18(2), 275-295. DOI:
  27. Pandit, J., Bhardwaj, S. K., & Sharma, A. K. (2021). Urban sustainability analysis of Solan district, Himachal Pradesh, India. Current Science (00113891), 120 (7). DOI:
  28. Rees, W. E. (1996). Revisiting carrying capacity: area-based indicators of sustainability. Population and environment, 17(3), 195-215. DOI:
  29. Ren, W. X., Geng, Y., Xue, B., Fujita, T., Ma, Z. X., & Jiang, P. (2012). Pursuing co-benefits in China’s old industrial base: A case of Shenyang. Urban Climate, 1, 55-64. DOI:
  30. Seto, K. C., Güneralp, B., & Hutyra, L. R. (2012). Global forecasts of urban expansion to 2030 and direct impacts on biodiversity and carbon pools. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(40), 16083-16088. DOI:
  31. Shaban, A., Kourtit, K., & Nijkamp, P. (2020). India’s urban system: Sustainability and imbalanced growth of cities. Sustainability, 12(7), 2941. DOI:
  32. Soltani, A., & Sharifi, E. (2012). A case study of sustainable urban planning principles in Curitiba (Brazil) and their applicability in Shiraz (Iran). Int. J. Dev. Sustain, 1, 120–134.
  33. Sudhira, H. S., & Gururaja, K. V. (2012). Population crunch in India: is it urban or still rural?. Current Science, 37-40.
  34. Świąder, M., Lin, D., Szewrański, S., Kazak, J. K., Iha, K., van Hoof, J., & Altiok, S. (2020). The application of ecological footprint and biocapacity for environmental carrying capacity assessment: A new approach for European cities. Environmental Science & Policy, 105, 56-74. DOI:
  35. Taipale, K., Fellini, C., & Le Blanc, D. (2012). Challenges and way forward in the urban sector Sustainable Development in the 21st century (SD21). United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA).
  36. Turok, I. (2014). The evolution of national urban policies: a global overview. UN-HABITAT. Cities Alliance, Nairobi, Kenya.
  37. United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2018). World Urbanization Prospects.
  38. Uttara, S., Bhuvandas, N., & Aggarwal, V. (2012). Impacts of urbanization on environment. International Journal of Research in Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2(2), 1637-1645.
  39. Wackernagel, M. (2014). Comment on “ecological footprint policy? land use as an environmental indicator”. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 18(1), 20-23. DOI:
  40. Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological footprint: reducing human impact on the earth (Vol. 9). New society publishers.
  41. Wackernagel, M., Chamber, N., Simmons, C. (2002). Sharing Nature’s Interest: Ecological Footprints as an indicator of Sustainability. Earthscan: London, UK.
  42. Wackernagel, M., Monfreda, C., Moran, D., Wermer, P., Goldfinger, S., Deumling, D., & Murray, M. (2005). National footprint and biocapacity accounts 2005: the underlying calculation method.
  43. Wackernagel, M., Monfreda, C., Moran, D., Wermer, P., Goldfinger, S., Deumling, D., & Murray, M. (2005). National footprint and biocapacity accounts 2005: the underlying calculation method.
  44. Wilson, J., & Anielski, M. (2004). Ecological footprints of Canadian municipalities and regions.
  45. Yue, D., Xu, X., Hui, C., Xiong, Y., Han, X., & Ma, J. (2011). Biocapacity supply and demand in Northwestern China: A spatial appraisal of sustainability. Ecological Economics, 70(5), 988-994. DOI:
  46. Zhang, J. F., Zhang, D. X., Zhao, G. C., Zeng, H., & Wen, H. Z. (2019). Land supply and urbanization strategy in the Yangtze River Delta region, China. Growth and Change, 50(4), 1338-1355. DOI:
  47. Zhao, M. Y., Cheng, C. T., Chau, K. W., & Li, G. (2006). Multiple criteria data envelopment analysis for full ranking units associated to environment impact assessment. International Journal of Environment and Pollution, 28(3-4), 448-464. DOI: