The World Is Not Enough According To WWF’s Living Planet Report 2016 (in fact, we require the ‘biocapacity equivalent of 1.6 Earths’)

There’s a real-life international power struggle and the antagonist is man ‘demanding more from the planet than it can renew,’ reports WWF in the Living Planet Report 2016

‘Since the early 1970s, humanity has been demanding more from the planet than it can renew (see below). By 2012,’ writes WWF in the Living Planet Report (LPR), ‘the biocapacity equivalent of 1.6 Earths was needed to provide the natural resources and services humanity consumed in that year (Global Footprint Network, 2016). Exceeding the Earth’s biocapacity is possible only in the short term. Only for a brief period can we cut trees faster than they mature, harvest more fish than the oceans can replenish, or emit more carbon into the atmosphere than the forests and oceans can absorb. The consequences of “overshoot” are already clear: habitat and species loss, and accumulation of carbon in the atmosphere (Tittensor et al., 2014; UNEP, 2012).’

Global Ecological Footprint by component vs Earth’s biocapacity, 1961-2012:

Carbon is the dominant component of humanity’s Ecological Footprint (ranging from 43 per cent in 1961 to 60 per cent in 2012). It is the largest Footprint component at the global level as well as for 145 of the 233 countries and territories tracked in 2012. Its primary cause has been the burning of fossil fuels – coal, oil and natural gas. The green line represents the Earth’s capacity to produce resources and ecological services (i.e., the biocapacity). It has been upward trending slightly, mainly due to increased productivities in agriculture (Global Footprint Network, 2016). Data are given in global hectares (gha).

Source: WWF. 2016. Living Planet Report 2016. Risk and resilience in a new era. WWF International, Gland, Switzerland.