ABSTRACT
The ecological footprint of the dwelling is potentially quite a large contributor to the overall footprint. Based on existing studies the overall contribution from the dwelling and its use varies from as low as 8 per cent of the total (Close and Foran, 1998) to as high as 22 per cent (WWF Scotland, 2007) in different locations. Stechbart and Wilson (2010) in a recent study of Ontario, Canada estimated the dwelling contribution as 14 per cent of the total footprint, while Wiedmann et al.'s (2008) estimates for various locations in Australia range from 18 to 21 per cent. The lower estimate (8 per cent) by Close and Foran (1998) is based on 1993 dwelling occupancy in Canberra, Australia, which was 2.8 persons per dwelling. This is quite high compared to current estimates for average dwelling occupancy in the UK (2.3 in 2011; Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012: 2), Australia (2.5 in 2011; Department of Infrastructure and Transport, 2010) and in Scotland (2.2 in 2004; General Registrar Office for Scotland, 2006). The disparity in dwelling contribution to the total footprint may also be attributed to the different methodologies used by the authors, as there is no commonly agreed methodology for calculating the ecological footprint. While Close and Foran (1998) used process analysis, Wiedmann et al. (2008) used the economic input-output methodology to trace regional resource use. Both systems have inherent weaknesses, leading to inaccuracies which have been highlighted (Czamanski and Malizia, 1969; van den Bergh and Verbruggen, 1999; Lenzen and Murray, 2001). Despite these inaccuracies, ecological footprint is still a useful indicator of human impact. It could be argued that, globally, the dwelling contribution to the total footprint of wealthy nations is around 15 to 20 per cent of the total footprint if use of the dwelling is also included.
