ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Materiālu plūsmas analīze (MFA)×Ekoloģiskās pēdas uzskaites metodika×
NozareIlgtspējaIlgtspēja
SaimeProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Izcelsmes gads20041996
AutorsBrunner & RechbergerMathis Wackernagel & William Rees
TipsQuantitative systems accounting methodEnvironmental accounting indicator
PirmavotsBrunner, P. H., & Rechberger, H. (2004). Practical Handbook of Material Flow Analysis. Lewis Publishers. ISBN: 978-1-56670-604-9Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. New Society Publishers. ISBN: 978-0-86571-312-3
Citi nosaukumiSubstance Flow Analysis, Bulk-MFA, Material Flux Analysis, Malzeme Akış AnaliziEFA, Ecological Footprint Analysis, Biocapacity Accounting, Ekolojik Ayak İzi
Saistītās32
KopsavilkumsMaterial Flow Analysis (MFA) is a systematic method for quantifying the flows and stocks of materials within a defined system boundary over a specified time period. Introduced comprehensively by Paul H. Brunner and Helmut Rechberger in their 2004 handbook, MFA applies mass-balance principles to track how raw materials, products, wastes, and emissions move through industrial, urban, or national metabolisms, enabling evidence-based resource management and waste policy.Ecological Footprint Accounting (EFA) is a resource accounting framework that measures how much biologically productive land and water area a human population requires to produce the resources it consumes and to absorb the waste it generates. Introduced by Mathis Wackernagel and William Rees in 1996, it compares human demand on nature against Earth's regenerative capacity, expressed in standardized global hectares (gha).
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 1 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 1 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Material Flow Analysis · Ecological Footprint. Izgūts 2026-06-18 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare