G20 nations account for most global resource consumption. While the public is increasingly focusing on reducing its ecological footprint (EF) for sustainability, biocapacity (BC) also deserves attention. This study therefore investigates 19 G20 countries over the period 1994–2024, using a combination of cross-regional comparative analysis and an extended STIRPAT model with two-way fixed effects to examine the distinct factors associated with EF per capita and BC per capita. We find a striking divergence: EF per capita declined in 10 countries, while BC per capita declined in 17 countries over the study period. Our regression results show that GNI per capita and carbon intensity are positively and significantly associated with EF per capita, while a higher household final consumption share is associated with lower EF per capita. For BC per capita, higher GDP per capita and population density are associated with reductions. Urbanization is positively associated with EF per capita and with BC per capita in the Gini-available subsample. Our findings suggest that we should step up efforts to protect and accumulate natural capital, as measured by BC per capita, while also investigating the environmental benefits of urbanization. Furthermore, countries at different development levels should respectively transform development methodologies and establish cooperative mechanisms to balance the overall ecological burden.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: