From a natural resource management viewpoint, Ecological Footprint analysis is a valuable tool for development that provides a measure of what needs to be achieved through tackling “over-consumption” in the north, whilst simultaneously addressing poverty in the south.

When the area of a country is portrayed as its national ecofootprint expressed as a proportion of the total global ecofootprint, inequities around the globe become starkly clear.

This stratified approach is complemented by the work of three SEDfIG policy groups, focused upon:

• Skills & Employability (S&E)
• The Knowledge Economy (KE)
• Tackling Ecological Footprint (TEF)

These groups are designed to share expertise, increase capacity and take forward key challenges through partnership, thereby enhancing local authority capacity. Colin Tingle is a member of the TEF policy group.

The key aim of this project was to assist individual local authorities in achieving all the Diamond targets through the provision of:

	Up-to-date baseline ecological footprint assessments (by authority and by Diamond) using the Resource & Energy Analysis Programme (REAP)
	An interpretation of footprint results identifying key variables and ‘big hitters’ (by authority and Diamond)
	Generic building blocks, practical actions and policy guidance, to assist LAs in developing a local Action Plan or ‘Route Map’ to address the key variables and ‘big hitters’ and so deliver the accelerated targets– to include advice on monitoring progress using existing or supplementary indicators
	Case studies of ‘best practice’ in eco-, carbon- and water-footprint reduction from within and outside the South East

All outputs were focused on providing practical advice and guidance as opposed to in-depth data analysis.

The project report delivers the baseline REAP analyses (which takes a consumption-based approach to footprinting) for the ecological and carbon footprint, supplemented by additional direct carbon emissions, water and waste analyses – all presented for each Diamond.
Useful inputs into the “No-Nonsense Guide” and associated Action ‘catalogue’ include:

• The profiles of carbon and ecological footprint results are similar.
  • There is little benefit in differentiating between them in Action Plans

• The majority of SE Diamonds show a footprint above UK average.
  • The Diamonds could usefully learn from regional best practice.

• Diamonds with the largest total footprints are PUSH, Thames Gateway & Kent (TG) and Reading
  • Percentage reductions in these Diamonds will yield the greatest carbon savings (largely due to their size and population, in the first 2 cases). Reading has the highest total and per capita footprint and should therefore be a top priority for any geographically focused actions.

• There is relatively little variation in consumption-based ecological & carbon footprint totals between Diamonds. Variation is typically around 10%.
  • On this basis, there would seem to be little merit in tailoring Action Plans geographically at the Diamond level.

• At component level the variation is higher, up to 15%. The ‘big hitters’ are universally housing, transport and food (between them accounting for typically 60-70% of the footprint).
  • Action Plans should focus on initiative to reduce these components of individual consumption.

• There is a considerable variation in LA footprints within Diamonds, especially in larger ones. This variation is more than 20% (more than the average variation between Diamonds).
  • Action Plans need to be flexible enough to recognise variability at the LA level within each Diamonds. However, this should be balanced against the need for concerted action to tackle the cross-cutting themes of housing, transport and food.

• Direct emissions data showed that industrial and commercial activities can impact significantly on the footprint of an area and lead to greater differentiation than consideration of personal consumption alone.
  • Action Plans need to take account of the type and nature of each Diamond’s economy.

• Water use is high throughout the SE Diamonds. Brighton and Hove stands out as the area of highest consumption personal consumption alone.
  • Some Actions should be developed targeted at water. A detailed water case study would also be useful. The B & H Diamond would be the best place to trial any new schemes.

• Waste impacts are similar to, or less than, the English average. However, waste arisings and management practices vary considerably throughout the Diamonds.
  • Some Performance on waste is relatively good. However, the data shows that there is still considerable room for improvement. Actions should build on best practice within the South East.

A further output - a ‘Dashboard tool’ that readily and accessibly display results from the footprint analyses - is also presented. This tool was developed by Best Foot Forward and has been very well received by all that have seen and used it, with the result that it has been additionally provided to SEI for use in displaying all results from REAP in the future.