Special Issue "Water Footprint: Usefulness of the Concept from Accounting Framework to Policy Response Options in Water Resources Management"

Quicklinks

Special Issue Editors
Special Issue Information
Keywords
Published Papers
Planned Papers

A special issue of Water (ISSN 2073-4441).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 July 2010)

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Dr. Ashok K. Chapagain
Fresh Water/Sustainable Consumption, WWF-UK, Panda House, Weyside Park,GU7 1XR Godalming, Surrey, UK
Website: http://www.water-footprint.com/speakers.asp#Chapagain
E-Mail: achapagain@wwf.org.uk
Phone: +44 1483 412 507
Interests: water and environmental resources management; water policy; sustainable consumption; agricultural water use; irrigation; resource use accounting (water footprint, carbon footprint and ecological footprint); water resources assessment; virtual water; globalisation of water resources

Special Issue Information

Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. Papers will be published continuously (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are refereed through a peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Water is an international peer-reviewed Open Access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 500 CHF (Swiss Francs). English correction and/or formatting fees of 250 CHF (Swiss Francs) will be charged in certain cases for those articles accepted for publication that require extensive additional formatting and/or English corrections.

Keywords

Methodological issues
Water Footprint of products: methods and case studies
Water Footprint of a river basin: examples from river basins shared internally and internationally
Water Footprint of a nation, group of countries or a region
Water Footprint in relation to understanding the risk to businesses
An alternative to inter-basin river transfer
Water Footprint linking food and water security
A lens to Climate Change impacts on water resources
Trade offs and links between Water Footprint and Carbon Footprint

Published Papers (3 papers)

Tim Hess

Article: Estimating Green Water Footprints in a Temperate Environment

Water 2010, 2(3), 351-362; doi:10.3390/w2030351

Received: 9 June 2010; in revised form: 2 July 2010 / Accepted: 12 July 2010 / Published: 14 July 2010

Show/Hide Abstract | Download PDF Full-text (516 KB)

Arjen Y. Hoekstra

Article: The Global Dimension of Water Governance: Why the River Basin Approach Is No Longer Sufficient and Why Cooperative Action at Global Level Is Needed

Water 2011, 3(1), 21-46; doi:10.3390/w3010021

Received: 8 November 2010; in revised form: 11 December 2010 / Accepted: 19 December 2010 / Published: 29 December 2010

Show/Hide Abstract | Download PDF Full-text (248 KB)

Kuishuang Feng, Klaus Hubacek, Jan Minx, Yim Ling Siu, Ashok Chapagain, Yang Yu, Dabo Guan and John Barrett

Article: Spatially Explicit Analysis of Water Footprints in the UK

Water 2011, 3(1), 47-63; doi:10.3390/w3010047

Received: 20 November 2010; in revised form: 22 November 2010 / Accepted: 25 December 2010 / Published: 30 December 2010

Show/Hide Abstract | Download PDF Full-text (3531 KB)

Abstract: The Water Footprint, as an indicator of water consumption has become increasingly popular for analyzing environmental issues associated with the use of water resources in the global supply chain of consumer goods. This is particularly relevant for countries like the UK, which increasingly rely on products produced elsewhere in the world and thus impose pressures on foreign water resources. Existing studies calculating water footprints are mostly based on process analysis, and results are mainly available at the national level. The current paper assesses the domestic and foreign water requirements for UK final consumption by applying an environmentally extended multi-regional input-output model in combination with geo-demographic consumer segmentation data. This approach allows us to calculate water footprints (both direct and indirect) for different products as well as different geographies within the UK. We distinguished between production and consumption footprints where the former is the total water consumed from the UK domestic water resources by the production activities in the UK and the latter is the total water consumed from both domestic and global water resources to satisfy the UK domestic final consumption. The results show that the production water footprint is 439 m³/cap/year, 85% of which is for the final consumption in the UK itself. The average consumption water footprint of the UK is more than three times bigger than the UK production water footprint in 2006. About half of the UK consumption water footprints were associated with imports from Non-OECD countries (many of which are water-scarce), while around 19% were from EU-OECD countries, and only 3% from Non-EU-OECD countries. We find that the water footprint differs considerably across sub-national geographies in the UK, and the differences are as big as 273 m³/cap/year for the internal water footprint and 802 m³/cap/year for the external water footprint. Our results suggest that this is mainly explained by differences in the average income level across the UK. We argue that the information provided by our model at different spatial scales can be very useful for informing integrated water supply and demand side management.

Planned Papers

The below list represents only planned manuscripts. Some of these manuscripts have not been received by the Editorial Office yet. Papers submitted to MDPI journals are subject to peer-review.

Type of Paper: Review
Provisory Title: Impact of climate change on water resources and water footprint
Author: Velma I. Grover
Affiliation: Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Canada; E-Mail: vgrover@rogers.com
Provisory Abstract: The article will explore the impact of climate change on water cycle followed by a discussion on linkages of climate change on global water availability and its impact on environmental services, health and most importantly (for this article) on agriculture (and food security issues). The article will then look into use of the concept of water footprint on national policies on effective water management (holistic/integrated approach to manage impact of climate change and water shortages) including agricultural practices in terms of irrigation system, water losses, water productivity and selection of crops for regions.

Type of Paper: Article
Provisory Title: Comparing Water Footprints with their Carbon and Ecological Cousins
Author: Dennis Wichelns
Affiliation: Department of Agricultural Economics, California State University at Fresno, Fresno, CA, USA; E-Mail: dwichelns@csufresno.edu
Provisory Abstract: Many authors in recent years have developed empirical estimates of water footprints to illustrate the water used in the production and processing of selected goods and services. Many public agencies, private companies, and non-governmental organizations have adopted the water footprint approach to describing water use, both locally and regionally. Often the goal of discussing water footprints is to highlight opportunities for improving water use efficiency. Several authors have extended the literature regarding water footprints to include discussion of similarities and analogies with carbon and ecological footprints. Those constructs, while developed for somewhat similar purposes, actually describe somewhat different phenomena. In this paper, I describe the conceptual differences between water, carbon, and ecological footprints, with the goal of highlighting similarities and differences. Acknowledging the differences between these constructs will be helpful in ensuring that water footprint analysis is interpreted with due consideration for its appropriateness as well as its conceptual limitations.

Type of Paper: Article
Provisory Title: Water footprint in context: Some notes on risk, impacts and response
Authors: Brian Richter ¹ and Stuart Orr ²
Affiliation: ¹ Global Freshwater Program, The Nature Conservancy, Virginia, USA; E-Mail: brichter@tnc.org;
² WWF International, Gland, Switzerland; E-Mail: sorr@wwfint.org
Provisory Abstract: Refinement of the water footprint concept from national and global advocacy to watershed relevance is necessary for wider uptake of this concept as a measurement or risk tool. While there is continuous improvement of the volumetric aspect of the WF, the logical next step in its evolution is the grounding of the volumetric numbers into the context of its use, at the scale of local watersheds. The application of the WF concept within local watersheds requires an assessment of the particular physical (water quantity, water quality), ecological, and social impacts associated with WFs. Yet impacts assessment is an area of great debate among the water accounting community, with competing suggestions in interpretation, and differing opinions about appropriate ways to mitigate any purported impact of water use. This paper explores some of these debates and reflects on assumptions that are being made related to impacts, risks and responses from water footprint assessments. The hydrologic, social and political realities of the context of water use have implications not only for determining the right responses to mitigate risks and impacts, but also the potential application of the WF concept at the watershed level.

Type of Paper: Review
Provisory Title: Regional Development, ‘virtual water’ and the ‘water footprint’: review of the application of the concepts in agricultural production and agricultural products process industries
Authors: Athanasios Loukas, Stelios Gialis and Kalioppi Michailidou
Affiliation: Laboratory of Hydrology and Analysis of Aquatic Systems, University of Thessaly; E-Mail: aloukas@uth.gr (A.L.)
Provisory Abstract: This paper underlines that, ‘virtual-water’ and ‘water-footprint’ can offer meaningful insights into current socio-economic inquiry on water scarcity and sustainable regional development. In fact, both concepts could offer for a re-theorization of the unequal character of the value production processes nowadays. The paper proposes that, although the consequences of this inequality has been widely discussed in terms of economic development and wealth distribution, little effort has been driven towards an interpretation of the interdependence between uneven regional development and stratified access to water on behalf of productive activities, firms and citizens. In this frame, the paper reviews the studies which focus on the virtual water embodied in the agricultural production processes, on one hand, and its consequences for regional development, on the other. In parallel, the study discusses the possible interrelationships between the virtual water of agricultural sector and the water footprint of that specific part of industrial production based on agricultural inputs. It highlights recent advances as well as inadequacies in research efforts which attempt to estimate virtual water and water footprint, often by using GIS techniques. Finally the paper offers some tentative conclusions on the wider meanings of virtual water and water footprint in relation to the unequal character of current socio-spatial development and water availability.

Type of Paper: Article
Title: Estimating Green Water Footprints in a Temperate Environment
Author: Tim Hess
Affiliation: Cranfield University, Cranfield, Bedford, MK43 0AL, UK; E-Mail: t.hess@cranfield.ac.uk
Abstract: The “green” water footprint (GWF) of a product is often considered less important than the “blue” water footprint (BWF) as “green” water generally has a low, or even negligible, opportunity cost. However, when considering food, fibre and tree products, is not only a useful indicator of the total appropriation of a natural resource, but from a methodological perspective, blue water footprints are frequently estimated as the residual after green water is subtracted from total crop water use. In most published studies, green water use (ETgreen) has been estimated from the FAO CROPWAT model using the USDA method for effective rainfall. In this study, four methods for the estimation of the ETgreen of pasture were compared. Two were based on effective rainfall estimated from monthly rainfall and potential evapotranspiration, and two were based on a simulated water balance using long-term daily, or average monthly, weather data from 11 stations in England. The results show that the effective rainfall methods significantly underestimate the annual ETgreen in all cases, as they do not adequately account for the depletion of stored soil water during the summer. A simplified model, based on annual rainfall and reference evapotranspiration (ETo) has been tested and used to map the average annual ETgreen of pasture in England.
Keywords: CROPWAT, effective rainfall, England, green water footprint, pasture

Last update: 30 December 2010

Water EISSN 2073-4441 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert