Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan

David Nasir Morris; Malik Doka Morjan; Moses Osman Mathew Woni; Charles Manya; John Apuruot Akec

doi:doi:10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Research Article |

| Peer-Reviewed

Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan

David Nasir Morris^*

, Malik Doka Morjan

, Moses Osman Mathew Woni

, Charles Manya

, John Apuruot Akec

Published in American Journal of Environmental Protection (Volume 13, Issue 6)

Received: 12 November 2024 Accepted: 27 November 2024 Published: 13 December 2024

Views: Downloads:

Download PDF

Share This Article

Twitter
Linked In
Facebook

Abstract

Given the growing population of students and the new infrastructural development at the University of Juba, it is environmentally significant to investigate the ecological footprint of the University campus ecosystem in light of environmental sustainability. This study aims to assess and quantify the ecological footprint at University of Juba campus and compare them to the environmental sustainability. In this study cross sectional survey of 180 students and component based methods by Rees and Wackernagel were employed to obtain results of ecological footprint of water, food, land, transport, waste and energy at the University of Juba. Considering Ecological Footprint of students and staff on campus, Biocapacity was 1.16, ecological footprint remainder was 1.06 and ecological footprint index was 0.92. While the ecological footprint of Water, food, transportation, waste, energy and built-up land footprint were 0.04, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0003 and 0.0002 gha/capita respectively. The result of the environmental sustainability practices on the campus revealed that 11 out of 44 environmental sustainable programs were not practiced on campus implying 27.7% of the university operation was unsustainable. Although, University of Juba was found to be environmentally sustainable, reducing its ecological footprint per capita by 0.89 gha/capita. Based on the study result, the Ecological Footprint per capita of water, energy, transportation, food, waste and build-up land at the University were environmentally sustainable (0.11 gha/capita). If, all people were living the lifestyle of the University of Juba, we would require only one planet Earth.

Published in	American Journal of Environmental Protection (Volume 13, Issue 6)
DOI	10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
Page(s)	219-233
Creative Commons	This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright	Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group

Keywords

Ecological Footprint, Environmental Sustainability, University of Juba, Biocapacity, Ecological Footprint Index

References

[1]	Rees, W. E. Ecological footprints and appropriated carrying capacity: What urban economics leaves out. Environ. Urban. 1992, 4, 121–130.
[2]	Morelli, John (2011) "Environmental Sustainability: A Definition for Environmental Professionals," Journal of Environmental Sustainability: Vol. 1: Iss. 1, Article 2. https://doi.org/10.14448/jes.01.0002
[3]	Ewing, B.; Moore, D.; Goldfinger, S.; Oursler, A.; Reed, A.; Wackernagel, M. The Ecological Footprint Atlas 2010; Global Footprint Network: Oakland, CA, USA, 2010.
[4]	Galli, A.; Wiedmann, T.; Ercin, E.; Knoblauch, D.; Ewing, B.; Giljum, S. Integrating Ecological, Carbon and Water footprint into a “Footprint Family” of indicators: Definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 16, 100–112.
[5]	Torregrosa-López, J. I.; Bellver-Navarro, C. G.; Lo Iacono-Ferreira, V. G. Experiences in the use of Ecological Footprint as a sustainability indicator. Cuad. de Biodivers. 2011.
[6]	Ecological Footprint by Country 2022. Retrieved 13 June 2023. Available at https://ecological footprint by country 2022.
[7]	Global Footprint Network. (2022). National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts, 2022 edition.
[8]	Blum, O.; Wackernagel, M. How to Build Lasting Success on Our Finite Planet; Global Footprint Network (GFN) and Schneider Electric, USA. 2020. Available online: https://roscongress.org/upload/medialibrary/6ea/Earth-Overshoot-Day-_-Final.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2021).
[9]	Ortegon, K.; Acosta, P. Ecological footprint: A tool for environmental management in educational institutions. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019, 20, 675–690.
[10]	Eckard Helmers; Chia Chien Chang; Justin Dauwels. (2021). Carbon footprinting of universities worldwide: Part I—objective comparison by standardized metrics. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-021-00454-6
[11]	Collins, A.; Flynn, A. Engaging with the ecological footprint as a decision-making tool: Process and responses. Local Environ. 2007, 12, 295–312.
[12]	Gottlieb, D.; Vigoda-Gadot, E.; Haim, A.; Kissinger, M. The ecological footprint as an educational tool for sustainability: A case study analysis in an Israeli public high school. Educ. Dev. 2012, 32, 193–200.
[13]	Vaisi, S.; Alizadeh, H.; Lotfi, W.; Mohammadi, S. Developing the Ecological Footprint Assessment for a University Campus, the Component-Based Method. Sustainability 2021, 13, 9928. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13179928
[14]	University of Juba – Inventing the Future Transforming the Society. Retrieved 19 September 2023. Available at https://uoj.edu.ss
[15]	Dnsamudre (26 August 2021). "South Sudan's Top 5 Universities in the 2022 - web insights". Worldtop-100. Retrieved 6 October 2022.
[16]	Syrovátka, M. On sustainability interpretations of the Ecological Footprint. Ecol. Econ. 2020, 169, 106543.
[17]	Janis, J. A. Quantifying the Ecological Footprint of the Ohio State University; Ohio State University: Columbus, OH, USA, 2007.
[18]	Mathis Wackernagel, Chad Monfreda, Dan Moran, Paul Wermer, Steve Goldfinger, Diana Deumling, Michael Murray May 25, 2005. National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts 2005: The underlying calculation method.
[19]	Lenzen, M.; Murray, S. A. A modified ecological footprint method and its application to Australia. Ecol. Econ. 2001, 37, 229–255.
[20]	IPCC (2006). IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme. Eggleston H. S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds). Kanagawa, Japan, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.
[21]	Bovea, D. M; Valls-Val, K (2021) Carbon footprint in Higher Education Institutions: a literature review and prospects for future research.
[22]	Venetoulis, J. (2001). Assessing the ecological impact of a university. The ecological footprint for the University of Redlands.,
[23]	Mekonnen H, A. Y. Hoekstra, Four billion people facing severe water scarcity. Sci. Adv. 2, e1500323 (2016).
[24]	Liu, H.; Wang, X.; Yang, J.; Zhou, X.; Liu, Y. The ecological footprint evaluation of low carbon campuses based on life cycle assessment: A case study of Tianjin, China. Clean. Prod. 2017, 144, 266–278.
[25]	Yifan Gu. (2018). Environmental f ootprint assessment of green campus from a food-water-energy nexus prespective.
[26]	Long Qian, Qingling Rao, Hongbo Liu, Breda McCarthy, Li Xian Liu & Lingen Wang (2022) Food waste and associated carbon footprint: evidence from Chinese universities, Ecosystem Health and Sustainability, 8:1, 2130094, https://doi.org/10.1080/20964129.2022.2130094
[27]	GEMIS. (2020) Global emissions model for integrated systems. Free database, http://iinas.org/gemis.html . Accessed 5 Oct 2020.
[28]	Klein-Banai, C.; Theis, T. L. An urban university’s ecological footprint and the effect of climate change. Ecol. Indic. 2011, 11, 857–860.
[29]	Conway, T. M., Dalton, C., Loo, J. and Benakoun, L. (2008), "Developing ecological footprint scenarios on university campuses: A case study of the University of Toronto at Mississauga", International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 4-20. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370810842157
[30]	Global Temperature Rise. The Evidence for Rapid Climate Change. 2021. Available online: https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/ (accessed on 12 February 2021).
[31]	FAO. 2023. Land Cover Atlas of the Republic of South Sudan. Rome. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc6216en
[32]	Monfreda, C.; Wackernagel, M.; Deumling, D. Establishing national natural capital accounts based on detailed ecological footprint and biological capacity assessments. Land Use Policy 2004, 21, 231–246.
[33]	National Footprint and Biocapacity Accounts (NFBA) 2023 Edition. Available on; https://data.footprintnetwork.org/
[34]	Arsenault, J.; Talbot, J.; Boustani, L.; Gonzalès, R.; Manaugh, K. (2019) The environmental footprint of academic and student mobility in a large research-oriented university https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7840-1838
[35]	Sonetti, G; G. V. Fracastoro; P. Lombardi; C. Genta; S. Favaro. (2021) Quantitative assessment of environmental impacts at the urban scale: the ecological footprint of a university campus. Environment, Development and Sustainability https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01686-5
[36]	Perez-Lopez, J.-B.; Orro, A.; Novales, M. Environmental Impact of Mobility in Higher-Education Institutions: The Case of the Ecological Footprint at the University of A Coruña (Spain). Sustainability 2021, 13, 6190. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116190
[37]	United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division. World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision, Key Findings and Advance Tables. 2017. Available online: https://population.un.org/wpp/publications/files/wpp2017_keyfindings.pdf (accessed on 12 February 2021).
[38]	Lang, S. (2007). Environmental sustainability checklist to be used for projects submitted under EU regional funding.
[39]	Poveda, C. A.; Lipsett, M. G. A review of sustainability assessment and sustainability/environmental rating systems and credit weighting tools. Sustain. Dev. 2011, 4, 36–55.
[40]	Wackernagel, M.; Yount, J. D. The ecological footprint: An indicator of progress toward regional sustainability. Environ. Monit. Assess. 1998, 51, 511–529.
[41]	Wackernagel, M.; Onisto, L.; Bello, P.; Linares, A. C.; Falfán, I. S. L.; García, J. M.; Guerrero, A. I. S.; Guerrero, M. G. S. National natural capital accounting with the ecological footprint concept. Ecol. Econ. 1999, 29, 375–390.
[42]	Ferng, J.-J. Nested open systems: An important concept for applying ecological footprint analysis to sustainable development assessment. Ecol. Econ. 2014, 106, 105–111.
[43]	Alizadeh, H. The Challenge of Sustainable Urban Development in Third World Countries. In Proceedings of the Designing Soundscape for Sustainable Urban Development, Stockholm, Sweden, 30 September–1 October 2010.
[44]	Galli, A.; Kitzes, J; Wermer, P.; Wackernagel, M.; Niccolucci, V.; Tiezzi, E. (2007) An exploration of the mathematics behind the Ecological footprint. https://doi.org/10.2495/ECO-V2-N4-250-257
[45]	Hoekstra, A. Y. The Water Footprint of Modern Consumer Society, 2nd ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2019.

Cite This Article

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Morris, D. N., Morjan, M. D., Woni, M. O. M., Manya, C., Akec, J. A. (2024). Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. American Journal of Environmental Protection, 13(6), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Morris, D. N.; Morjan, M. D.; Woni, M. O. M.; Manya, C.; Akec, J. A. Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. Am. J. Environ. Prot. 2024, 13(6), 219-233. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Morris DN, Morjan MD, Woni MOM, Manya C, Akec JA. Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. Am J Environ Prot. 2024;13(6):219-233. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16,
  author = {David Nasir Morris and Malik Doka Morjan and Moses Osman Mathew Woni and Charles Manya and John Apuruot Akec},
  title = {Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan
},
  journal = {American Journal of Environmental Protection},
  volume = {13},
  number = {6},
  pages = {219-233},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajep.20241306.16},
  abstract = {Given the growing population of students and the new infrastructural development at the University of Juba, it is environmentally significant to investigate the ecological footprint of the University campus ecosystem in light of environmental sustainability. This study aims to assess and quantify the ecological footprint at University of Juba campus and compare them to the environmental sustainability. In this study cross sectional survey of 180 students and component based methods by Rees and Wackernagel were employed to obtain results of ecological footprint of water, food, land, transport, waste and energy at the University of Juba. Considering Ecological Footprint of students and staff on campus, Biocapacity was 1.16, ecological footprint remainder was 1.06 and ecological footprint index was 0.92. While the ecological footprint of Water, food, transportation, waste, energy and built-up land footprint were 0.04, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0003 and 0.0002 gha/capita respectively. The result of the environmental sustainability practices on the campus revealed that 11 out of 44 environmental sustainable programs were not practiced on campus implying 27.7% of the university operation was unsustainable. Although, University of Juba was found to be environmentally sustainable, reducing its ecological footprint per capita by 0.89 gha/capita. Based on the study result, the Ecological Footprint per capita of water, energy, transportation, food, waste and build-up land at the University were environmentally sustainable (0.11 gha/capita). If, all people were living the lifestyle of the University of Juba, we would require only one planet Earth.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan

AU  - David Nasir Morris
AU  - Malik Doka Morjan
AU  - Moses Osman Mathew Woni
AU  - Charles Manya
AU  - John Apuruot Akec
Y1  - 2024/12/13
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
T2  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
JF  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
JO  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
SP  - 219
EP  - 233
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5699
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
AB  - Given the growing population of students and the new infrastructural development at the University of Juba, it is environmentally significant to investigate the ecological footprint of the University campus ecosystem in light of environmental sustainability. This study aims to assess and quantify the ecological footprint at University of Juba campus and compare them to the environmental sustainability. In this study cross sectional survey of 180 students and component based methods by Rees and Wackernagel were employed to obtain results of ecological footprint of water, food, land, transport, waste and energy at the University of Juba. Considering Ecological Footprint of students and staff on campus, Biocapacity was 1.16, ecological footprint remainder was 1.06 and ecological footprint index was 0.92. While the ecological footprint of Water, food, transportation, waste, energy and built-up land footprint were 0.04, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0003 and 0.0002 gha/capita respectively. The result of the environmental sustainability practices on the campus revealed that 11 out of 44 environmental sustainable programs were not practiced on campus implying 27.7% of the university operation was unsustainable. Although, University of Juba was found to be environmentally sustainable, reducing its ecological footprint per capita by 0.89 gha/capita. Based on the study result, the Ecological Footprint per capita of water, energy, transportation, food, waste and build-up land at the University were environmentally sustainable (0.11 gha/capita). If, all people were living the lifestyle of the University of Juba, we would require only one planet Earth.

VL  - 13
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download

Author Information

David Nasir Morris

Department of Environmental Studies, College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, University of Juba, Juba, South Sudan

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0009-9995-2661
Malik Doka Morjan

Department of Wildlife Science, College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, University of Juba, Juba, South Sudan

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2997-5042
Moses Osman Mathew Woni

Department of Environmental Studies, College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, University of Juba, Juba, South Sudan

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0008-8104-7383
Charles Manya

Department of Environmental Studies, College of Natural Resources and Environmental Studies, University of Juba, Juba, South Sudan

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3518-874X
John Apuruot Akec

Departmentment of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Juba, Juba, South Sudan

Contact Email

http://orcid.org/0009-0000-8320-8656

Download PDF

Sections

Plain Text BibTeX RIS

APA Style

Morris, D. N., Morjan, M. D., Woni, M. O. M., Manya, C., Akec, J. A. (2024). Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. American Journal of Environmental Protection, 13(6), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

ACS Style

Morris, D. N.; Morjan, M. D.; Woni, M. O. M.; Manya, C.; Akec, J. A. Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. Am. J. Environ. Prot. 2024, 13(6), 219-233. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

AMA Style

Morris DN, Morjan MD, Woni MOM, Manya C, Akec JA. Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan. Am J Environ Prot. 2024;13(6):219-233. doi: 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16

Copy | Download

@article{10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16,
  author = {David Nasir Morris and Malik Doka Morjan and Moses Osman Mathew Woni and Charles Manya and John Apuruot Akec},
  title = {Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan
},
  journal = {American Journal of Environmental Protection},
  volume = {13},
  number = {6},
  pages = {219-233},
  doi = {10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16},
  eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ajep.20241306.16},
  abstract = {Given the growing population of students and the new infrastructural development at the University of Juba, it is environmentally significant to investigate the ecological footprint of the University campus ecosystem in light of environmental sustainability. This study aims to assess and quantify the ecological footprint at University of Juba campus and compare them to the environmental sustainability. In this study cross sectional survey of 180 students and component based methods by Rees and Wackernagel were employed to obtain results of ecological footprint of water, food, land, transport, waste and energy at the University of Juba. Considering Ecological Footprint of students and staff on campus, Biocapacity was 1.16, ecological footprint remainder was 1.06 and ecological footprint index was 0.92. While the ecological footprint of Water, food, transportation, waste, energy and built-up land footprint were 0.04, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0003 and 0.0002 gha/capita respectively. The result of the environmental sustainability practices on the campus revealed that 11 out of 44 environmental sustainable programs were not practiced on campus implying 27.7% of the university operation was unsustainable. Although, University of Juba was found to be environmentally sustainable, reducing its ecological footprint per capita by 0.89 gha/capita. Based on the study result, the Ecological Footprint per capita of water, energy, transportation, food, waste and build-up land at the University were environmentally sustainable (0.11 gha/capita). If, all people were living the lifestyle of the University of Juba, we would require only one planet Earth.
},
 year = {2024}
}

Copy | Download

TY  - JOUR
T1  - Ecological Footprint for Environmental Sustainability at the University of Juba, South Sudan

AU  - David Nasir Morris
AU  - Malik Doka Morjan
AU  - Moses Osman Mathew Woni
AU  - Charles Manya
AU  - John Apuruot Akec
Y1  - 2024/12/13
PY  - 2024
N1  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
DO  - 10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
T2  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
JF  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
JO  - American Journal of Environmental Protection
SP  - 219
EP  - 233
PB  - Science Publishing Group
SN  - 2328-5699
UR  - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajep.20241306.16
AB  - Given the growing population of students and the new infrastructural development at the University of Juba, it is environmentally significant to investigate the ecological footprint of the University campus ecosystem in light of environmental sustainability. This study aims to assess and quantify the ecological footprint at University of Juba campus and compare them to the environmental sustainability. In this study cross sectional survey of 180 students and component based methods by Rees and Wackernagel were employed to obtain results of ecological footprint of water, food, land, transport, waste and energy at the University of Juba. Considering Ecological Footprint of students and staff on campus, Biocapacity was 1.16, ecological footprint remainder was 1.06 and ecological footprint index was 0.92. While the ecological footprint of Water, food, transportation, waste, energy and built-up land footprint were 0.04, 0.03, 0.03, 0.01, 0.0003 and 0.0002 gha/capita respectively. The result of the environmental sustainability practices on the campus revealed that 11 out of 44 environmental sustainable programs were not practiced on campus implying 27.7% of the university operation was unsustainable. Although, University of Juba was found to be environmentally sustainable, reducing its ecological footprint per capita by 0.89 gha/capita. Based on the study result, the Ecological Footprint per capita of water, energy, transportation, food, waste and build-up land at the University were environmentally sustainable (0.11 gha/capita). If, all people were living the lifestyle of the University of Juba, we would require only one planet Earth.

VL  - 13
IS  - 6
ER  -

Copy | Download