Search

We have combined estimates of the UK’s supply of fresh fruit and vegetables (1996 - 2015) with estimates of water requirements and water scarcity in producing countries, to identify where the supply is exposed to physical, regulatory and reputational water risks and how this has changed over time. Some 76% of the freshwater consumed in the supply of fresh fruit and vegetables to the UK is withdrawn overseas. The supply chain is particularly exposed to water risks in Spain, Egypt, South Africa, Chile, Morocco, Israel and Peru. Exposure has increased over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Water scarcity severely affects drylands threatening their food security, whereas, the oil and gas industry produces significant and increasing volumes of produced water that could be partly reused for agricultural irrigation in these regions. In this review, we summarise recent research and provide a broad overview of the potential for oil and gas produced water to irrigate food crops in drylands. The quality of produced water is often a limiting factor for the reuse in irrigation as it can lead to soil salinisation and sodification. Although the inappropriate use of produced water in irrigation could be damaging for the soil, the agricultural sector in dry areas is often prone to challenges in soil salinity. There is a lack of knowledge about the main environmental and economic conditions that could encourage or limit the development of irrigation with oil and gas effluents at the scale of drylands in the world. Cheaper treatment technologies in combination with farm-based salinity management techniques could make the reuse of produced water relevant to irrigate high value-crops in hyper-arid areas. This review paper approaches an aspect of the energy-water-food nexus: the opportunities and challenges behind the reuse of abundant oil and gas effluents for irrigation in hydrocarbon-rich but water-scarce and food-unsecured drylands. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Food production is a major contributor to a country's environmental burden. However, the burdens associated with individual foods vary significantly due to differing agricultural systems and locations, post-harvest storage, manufacturing and transport requirements. Dietary choices can therefore have a significant impact on the overall burdens associated with food consumption. Previous studies have generally considered changes in the proportion of animal-based foods in the diet or changes to a vegetarian, or a vegan diet. Using a life cycle assessment approach and data from published sources supplemented by original analysis, we estimated the blue water scarcity footprint and greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production, manufacture and distribution of three popular starchy carbohydrate foods as consumed in the United Kingdom – British fresh potatoes, Italian dried pasta and Indian dried basmati rice. Although similar to pasta in terms of greenhouse gas emissions per unit carbohydrate, when considered on the basis of typical portion size, potatoes have lower greenhouse gas emissions than pasta or basmati and the blue water scarcity footprint of basmati is two orders of magnitude greater than potatoes or pasta. The increasing preference for pasta and rice and reduction in household purchases of fresh potatoes in the United Kingdom over the period 1981–2010 has resulted in an increase in blue water scarcity footprint and a transfer of burdens from the United Kingdom to Italy and India, however the increased greenhouse gas emissions associated with rice and pasta has been, more or less, compensated by a reduction in emissions associated with purchases of potatoes. This paper has shown that dietary choices within food groups (in this case starchy carbohydrates) have a significant impact on an individual's contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and blue water scarcity footprint. The life cycle assessment approach is useful for understanding where the impacts of dietary choices occur and can inform the supply chain about where efforts should be targeted to reduce those impacts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large quantities of water are required to produce the food for a nation, some of which is derived within the country and some associated with imported food commodities. In this study, we consider the spatially explicit potential impact of alternative healthier eating scenarios for the UK on global blue water scarcity using the concept of a water scarcity footprint. The water required to produce the food consumed by the UK was estimated at 52.6 Gm 3 /y of which 93% is from rainfall at the point where it falls and 7% is “blue” water withdrawn from surface and ground water resources. Five alternative healthier diets were considered and the impact on the blue water scarcity footprint was modest (ranging from −3% to +2% compared to baseline). However more significant impacts were projected on the geographical distribution of the blue water scarcity footprint. This study has shown that if current trade patterns continue, policies to promote healthier eating in the UK may contribute to increased blue water scarcity at home and in other parts of the world. The use of virtual water estimates and global datasets of water scarcity can help to understand the potential environmental impacts of alternative diets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The availability of fresh water and the quality of aquatic ecosystems are important global concerns, and agriculture plays a major role. Consumers and manufacturers are increasingly sensitive to sustainability issues related to processed food products and drinks. The present study examines the production of sugar from the growing cycle through to processing to the factory gate, and identifies the potential impacts on water scarcity and quality and the ways in which the impact of water use can be minimised. We have reviewed the production phases and processing steps, and how calculations of water use can be complicated, or in some cases how assessments can be relatively straightforward. Finally, we outline several ways that growers and sugar processors are improving the efficiency of water use and reducing environmental impact, and where further advances can be made. This provides a template for the assessment of other crops. © 2013 Society of Chemical Industry [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Irrigation efficiency is more than a performance indicator or water-savings panacea. • Managing irrigation efficiency supports water, food and energy goals. • Insufficient understanding of irrigation efficiency may impede policy goals. • The meanings and use of irrigation efficiency depend on spatial scale and viewpoint. • A matrix of scales and dimensions is proposed to explore irrigation efficiency. An effective placement of irrigation efficiency in water management will contribute towards meeting the pre-eminent global water challenges of our time such as addressing water scarcity, boosting crop water productivity and reconciling competing water needs between sectors. However, although irrigation efficiency may appear to be a simple measure of performance and imply dramatic positive benefits, it is not straightforward to understand, measure or apply. For example, hydrological understanding that irrigation losses recycle back to surface and groundwater in river basins attempts to account for scale, but this generalisation cannot be readily translated from one location to another or be considered neutral for farmers sharing local irrigation networks. Because irrigation efficiency (IE) motives, measures, effects and technologies play out at different scales for different people, organisations and purposes, and losses differ from place to place and over time, IE is a contested term, highly changeable and subjective. This makes generalisations for science, management and policy difficult. Accordingly, we propose new definitions for IE and irrigation hydrology and introduce a framework, termed an 'irrigation efficiency matrix', comprising five spatial scales and ten dimensions to understand and critique the promises, pitfalls and paradoxes of IE and to unlock its utility for addressing contemporary water challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Water is a fundamental component in primary food production, whether it be rainfall, irrigation used to water crops, or for supplying drinking water for animals, while the amount of water in the soil determines it capacity to support machinery and animals. We identify that UK agriculture is exposed to five main water-related risks: agricultural drought, scarcity of water resources, restrictions on the right to abstract water, excess soil water, and inundation. Projected milder, wetter winters and hotter, drier summers by the end of the century will change the frequency, persistence, or severity of each of these risks. This paper critically reviews and synthesizes the scientific literature on the impact of these risks on primary food production and the technological and managerial strategies employed to build resilience to these changing risks. At the farm scale, the emphasis has been on strategies to build robustness to reduce the impact of a water-related risk. However, collaborative partnerships allow for a more optimal allocation of water during times of scarcity. Enhancing cross-scale interactions, learning opportunities, and catchment-scale autonomy will be key to ensuring the agricultural system can build adaptive and transformational capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Maintaining 'headroom' in licensed allocations help minimise the risk of negative impacts from water shortages. • Increasing system redundancy confers robustness but conflicts with pressures to maximise efficiency. • Pursuit of robustness and efficiency locks systems into rigid production pathways. • Financial pressures force growers to focus on persistence of robust outputs at the cost of adaptability and transformability. Food production systems worldwide are increasingly exposed to water shortage shocks. Social-ecological resilience theory provides insights into the qualities which confer production systems with the capacity to absorb shocks and persist, undertake adaptations and ultimately achieve desirable transformations. Combining findings from the analysis of a set of 15 semi-structured interviews and 92 survey responses from growers in the UK, this paper uses resilience theory to explore the factors affecting exposure to the risk of water shortages, and management responses, within outdoor field vegetable production systems that depend on supplemental irrigation. The findings confirm that growers predominantly aim to build resilience by seeking to maintain a buffer or 'headroom' in their water resources to minimise the possibility that a shortage will disrupt their output of marketable produce and/ or lead to financial loss. This buffering strategy confers robustness by increasing system redundancy (availability of spare resources). But building-in redundancy conflicts with regulatory and supply chain pressures to maximise water and production efficiency respectively. Whilst stability of supply to consumers is, for the most-part, achieved, the discrepant pursuits of robustness and efficiency lock agricultural systems into increasingly rigid production and sales pathways, limiting capacities for adaptation and transformation - dimensions of resilience which permit successful system evolution in the context of more extreme shocks and stresses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Water footprinting has emerged as an important approach to assess water use related effects from consumption of goods and services. Assessment methods are proposed by two different communities, the Water Footprint Network (WFN) and the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) community. The proposed methods are broadly similar and encompass both the computation of water use and its impacts, but differ in communication of a water footprint result. In this paper, we explain the role and goal of LCA and ISO-compatible water footprinting and resolve the six issues raised by Hoekstra (2016) in “A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA”. By clarifying the concerns, we identify both the overlapping goals in the WFN and LCA water footprint assessments and discrepancies between them. The main differing perspective between the WFN and LCA-based approach seems to relate to the fact that LCA aims to account for environmental impacts, while the WFN aims to account for water productivity of global fresh water as a limited resource. We conclude that there is potential to use synergies in research for the two approaches and highlight the need for proper declaration of the methods applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• This paper is built on the outcome and recommendations from FAO LEAP guidelines. • An international consensus on water use assessment is presented. • Water footprint concepts and water use information are detailed and connected in relation with each other. • Water scarcity footprint and water productivity are recommended for the assessment of water use. • Water productivity is reported with fractions of green and blue water consumed. The FAO Livestock Environmental Assessment and Performance (LEAP) Partnership organised a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) to develop reference guidelines on water footprinting for livestock production systems and supply chains. The mandate of the TAG was to i) provide recommendations to monitor the environmental performance of feed and livestock supply chains over time so that progress towards improvement targets can be measured, ii) be applicable for feed and water demand of small ruminants, poultry, large ruminants and pig supply chains, iii) build on, and go beyond, the existing FAO LEAP guidelines and iv) pursue alignment with relevant international standards, specifically ISO 14040 (2006) / ISO 14044 (2006) , and ISO 14046 (2014). The recommended guidelines on livestock water use address both impact assessment (water scarcity footprint as defined by ISO 14046, 2014) and water productivity (water use efficiency). While most aspects of livestock water use assessment have been proposed or discussed independently elsewhere, the TAG reviewed and connected these concepts and information in relation with each other and made recommendations towards comprehensive assessment of water use in livestock production systems and supply chains. The approaches to assess the quantity of water used for livestock systems are addressed and the specific assessment methods for water productivity and water scarcity are recommended. Water productivity assessment is further advanced by its quantification and reporting with fractions of green and blue water consumed. This allows the assessment of the environmental performance related to water use of a livestock-related system by assessing potential environmental impacts of anthropogenic water consumption (only "blue water"); as well as the assessment of overall water productivity of the system (including "green" and "blue water" consumption). A consistent combination of water productivity and water scarcity footprint metrics provides a complete picture both in terms of potential productivity improvements of the water consumption as well as minimizing potential environmental impacts related to water scarcity. This process resulted for the first time in an international consensus on water use assessment, including both the life-cycle assessment community with the water scarcity footprint and the water management community with water productivity metrics. Despite the main focus on feed and livestock production systems, the outcomes of this LEAP TAG are also applicable to many other agriculture sectors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]