|
Description:
|
This study addresses factors driving the variation in the per capita Ecological
Footprint (EF ) in Dallas County , Texas . A main hypothesis was that scientifically
estimated demography , environmental values , spatial attributes , and land -use patterns
surrounding an individual are significant factors in the size of per capita EF . This study
was based on the survey method and GIS routines . Additionally , a multiple regression
method was employed to address the study question . The survey measured respondents ? ?
EF using an ? ?Ecological Footprint Quiz ? ? consisting of sixteen questions regarding
individual food , mobility , housing , and goods /services consumption . GIS technologies
were used to objectively measure spatial attributes . The environmental values were
measured by selected questions regarding ecological crises .
This study found from the descriptive analysis that Dallas County ? ?s average
personal EF was 26 .4 acres : food (5 .1 ) , mobility (3 .3 ) , shelter (8 .3 ) , and goods and services (9 .8 ) . The study indicates that the residents need ecologically productive land
more than 105 times the area of the county .
Based on the explanatory analysis , the following summary points can be made
about the factors driving of the variance , not only in the per capita composite footprint
but also in each of the personal footprint components :
First , a highly educated , non -married , older male living in a high income
household located in a low population density area is more likely to have a larger
personal composite footprint . Second , a person with a weak environmental awareness
living where the ratio of employment opportunities (places to work ) is worse , and living
far from freeways and major lakes but close to major malls , is more likely to have a
larger personal food footprint . Third , a younger person living in a high income
household located close to major malls but far from Dallas /Fort Worth Airport is more
likely to have a larger mobility footprint . Fourth , a highly educated non -married older
male living in a highly developed area is more likely to have a larger shelter footprint .
Fifth , a highly educated non -married older male living in a high income household
located in a low population density area is more likely to have a larger goods and
services footprint . |