Water Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan, profile picture
Uploaded byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
PPT, PDF19 views

WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt

The document provides a comprehensive overview of water footprint concepts, including the definitions and assessments of green, blue, and grey water footprints associated with products and consumption. It discusses the implications of water footprint accounting for businesses and nations, emphasizing links between production, consumption, and environmental sustainability. The content also highlights the importance of understanding spatial and temporal dimensions of water use in addressing water scarcity and pollution issues globally.

Download to read offline
1 / 103
2 / 103
3 / 103
4 / 103
5 / 103
6 / 103
7 / 103
8 / 103
9 / 103
10 / 103
11 / 103
12 / 103
13 / 103
14 / 103
15 / 103
16 / 103
17 / 103
18 / 103
19 / 103
20 / 103
21 / 103
22 / 103
23 / 103
24 / 103
25 / 103
26 / 103
27 / 103
28 / 103
29 / 103
30 / 103
31 / 103
32 / 103
33 / 103
34 / 103
35 / 103
36 / 103
37 / 103
38 / 103
39 / 103
40 / 103
41 / 103
42 / 103
43 / 103
44 / 103
45 / 103
46 / 103
47 / 103
48 / 103
49 / 103
50 / 103
51 / 103
52 / 103
53 / 103
54 / 103
55 / 103
56 / 103
57 / 103
58 / 103
59 / 103
60 / 103
61 / 103
62 / 103
63 / 103
64 / 103
65 / 103
66 / 103
67 / 103
68 / 103
69 / 103
70 / 103
71 / 103
72 / 103
73 / 103
74 / 103
75 / 103
76 / 103
77 / 103
78 / 103
79 / 103
80 / 103
81 / 103
82 / 103
83 / 103
84 / 103
85 / 103
86 / 103
87 / 103
88 / 103
89 / 103
90 / 103
91 / 103
92 / 103
93 / 103
94 / 103
95 / 103
96 / 103
97 / 103
98 / 103
99 / 103
100 / 103
101 / 103
102 / 103
103 / 103
www.waterfootprint.org A Comprehensive Introduction to Water Footprints  2011 Arjen Y. Hoekstra Professor in Water Management – University of Twente – the Netherlands Scientific Director – Water Footprint Network
Overview - Freshwater scarcity & pollution - The water footprint of products - National water footprint accounting - The water footprint of a business - WF sustainability assessment - Response: reducing water footprints - Water Footprint Network
Freshwater scarcity and pollution
Coto Doñana National Park, southern Spain Strawberries for export Signs of global water scarcity
Former Aral Sea, Central Asia Cotton for export Signs of global water scarcity
Signs of global water pollution Devecser, Hungary, Oct. 5, 2010
Signs of global water pollution
The water footprint of a product
► the volume of fresh water used to produce the product, summed over the various steps of the production chain. ► when and where the water was used: a water footprint includes a temporal and spatial dimension. The water footprint of a product
The water footprint of a product Green water footprint ► volume of rainwater evaporated or incorporated into product. Blue water footprint ► volume of surface or groundwater evaporated, incorporated into product or returned to other catchment or the sea. Grey water footprint ► volume of polluted water.
Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Green water footprint Green water footprint Blue water footprint Blue water footprint Grey water footprint Grey water footprint Water consumption Water pollution [Hoekstra et al., 2011] Return flow Water withdrawal The traditional statistics on water use Components of a water footprint
The green and blue water footprint in relation to the water balance of a catchment area Runoff from catchment Ground- and surface water Soil and vegetation Precipitation Non production-related evapotranspiration Production-related evapotranspiration Abstraction Return flow Production-related evapotranspiration Water contained in products Water transfer to other catchment Runoff at field level Green water footprint Blue water footprint Catchment area Water contained in products [Hoekstra et al., 2011]
Assessing the blue and green process water footprint of growing a crop Water footprint of growing a crop  Crop water use (m3 /ha) / Crop yield (ton/ha) lgp 1 10 green green d CWU ET    lgp 1 10 blue blue d CWU ET   
Crop water use Green water evapotranspiration = min (crop water requirement, effective precipitation) Blue water evapotranspiration = min (irrigation requirement, effective irrigation)
Crop water requirement 1. Calculate reference crop evapotranspiration ET0 (mm/day) e.g. Penman-Monteith equation 2. Calculate crop evapotranspiration Etc (mm/day) Etc = ET0  Kc where Kc = crop coefficient 3. Calculate crop water requirement CWR (m3 /ha) CWR = Σ Etc [accumulate over growing period]
Irrigation requirement Irrigation requirement = crop water requirement – effective rainfall
Grey water footprint • volume of polluted freshwater that associates with the production of a product in its full supply-chain. • calculated as the volume of water that is required to assimilate pollutants based on ambient water quality standards.
Harvesting Cotton plant Seed-cotton Cotton seed Cotton lint Cotton seed cake Cotton seed oil Grey fabric Fabric Final textile Cotton linters Cotton, not carded or combed Cotton, carded or combed (yarn) Hulling/ extraction Garnetted stock Carding/ Spinning Yarn waste Knitting/ weaving Wet processing Finishing Cotton seed oil, refined Ginning 18 . 0 63 . 0 82 . 0 35 . 0 47 . 0 16 . 0 33 . 0 51 . 0 20 . 0 10 . 0 00 . 1 07 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 99 . 0 95 . 0 10 . 0 05 . 0 00 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 99 . 0 95 . 0 10 . 0 05 . 0 82 . 0 35 . 0 Legend Value fraction Product fraction Production chain cotton
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
Blue water footprint Million m3 /yr 2959M m3 /yr 690 Mm3 /yr 421 Mm3 /yr 2459 Mm3 /yr 803 Mm3 /yr 581 Mm3 /yr 533 Mm3 /yr 450 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on blue water resources [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (blue water)
283 Mm3 /yr 485 Mm3 /yr 3467 Mm3 /yr 165 Mm3 /yr Green water footprint Million m3 /yr 186 Mm3 /yr 325 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on green water resources Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (green water) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
Dilution water footprint Million m3 /yr 409 Mm3 /yr 310 Mm3 /yr 92 Mm3 /yr 102 Mm3 /yr 635 Mm3 /yr 83 Mm3 /yr 398 Mm3 /yr 697 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on global water resources due to pollution Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (grey water) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
The water footprint: making a link between consumption in one place and impacts on water systems elsewhere Shrinking Aral Sea
The water footprint: making a link between consumption in one place and impacts on water systems elsewhere [Photo: WWF] Endangered Indus River Dolphin
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] This is a global average and aggregate number. Policy decisions should be taken on the basis of: 1. Actual water footprint of certain coffee at the precise production location. 2. Ratio green/blue/grey water footprint. 3. Local impacts of the water footprint based on local vulnerability and scarcity.
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] Food ► 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean, etc) ► 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage, etc) Water ► 24000 litres for drinking ► 7000 litres for servicing. The water footprint of a cow 99% 1%
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]

Industrial systems Mixed systems Grazing systems Water footprint: •mostly green •local Water footprint: •green & blue •partly imported Water footprint: •green & blue •local
[Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
Water footprint of biofuels from different crops [litre/litre] [Gerbens-Leenes, Hoekstra & Van der Meer, 2009]
Water footprint of a consumer
► the total volume of water appropriated for the production of the goods and services consumed. ► equal to the sum of the water footprints of all goods and services consumed. ► dimensions of a water footprint • volume • where and when • type of water use: green, blue, grey Water footprint of a consumer
The total water footprint of a consumer in the UK ► about 3% of your water footprint is at home. 150 litre/day ► about 60 to 65% of your water footprint lies abroad. ► about 97% of your water footprint is ‘invisible’, it is related to the products you buy in the supermarket. 3400 litre/day for agricultural products 1100 litre/day for industrial products
Meat versus vegetarian diet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
Meat versus vegetarian diet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
Meat versus vegetarian diet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
National water footprint accounting
► total amount of water that is used to produce the goods and services consumed by the inhabitants of the nation. ► two components: • internal water footprint – inside the country. • external water footprint – in other countries. Water footprint of national consumption ► water footprint of national consumption = water footprint within the nation + virtual water import – virtual water export
Consumption Export Production Import Internal water footprint External water footprint WF of national consumpt. Water use for export Virtual water import for re- export Virtual water export + + = = WF within nation Virtual water import + + = = Virtual water budget + + = = National water use accounting framework The traditional statistics on water use, but then limited to withdrawals
Country/region National water footprint (Gm3 /year) from the perspective of production from the perspective of consumption Australia 91 27 Canada 123 63 China 893 883 Egypt 59 70 EU25 559 744 India 1013 987 Japan 54 146 Jordan 1.8 6.3 USA 750 696 [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] WF of national consumption WF within a nation Traditional statistics on water use, but then restricted to water withdrawal
Arrows show trade flows >10 Gm3 /yr Regional virtual water balances (only agricultural trade) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 China India Japan Pakistan Indonesia Brazil Mexico Russia Nigeria Thailand Italy USA Water footprint (m 3 /cap/yr) Domestic water consumption Industrial goods Agricultural goods Water footprint per capita Global average water footprint [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
1. Consumption characteristics  Consumption volume  Consumption pattern 2. Production circumstances  Climate: evaporative demand at place of production  Agricultural practice: water use efficiency Major determinants of the water footprint of national consumption
The water footprint of a business
Water risks for business • Physical risk • Reputational risk • Regulatory risk • Financial risk Water opportunity for business • frontrunner advantage • corporate image Corporate social responsibility Water footprint: why businesses are interested
Operational water footprint • the direct water use by the producer – for producing, manufacturing or for supporting activities. Supply-chain water footprint • the indirect water use in the producer’s supply chain. Water footprint of a business
• From operations to supply-chain thinking. • Shifting focus from water withdrawals to consumptive water use. • From securing the ‘right to abstract & emit’ to assessing the full range of economic, social and environmental impacts of water use in space and time. • From meeting emission standards to managing grey water footprint. Water footprint: what’s new for business
The water footprint of a consumer Indirect WF Direct WF blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Consumer blue water use grey water [Hoekstra, 2008]
The water footprint of a retailer blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Supply chain WF Operational WF Consumer blue water use grey water End-use WF of a product [Hoekstra, 2008] The traditional statistics on corporate water use
The water footprint of a food processor blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Supply chain WF Operational WF Consumer blue water use grey water End-use WF of a product [Hoekstra, 2008] The traditional statistics on corporate water use
• total volume of freshwater that is used directly and indirectly to run and support a business. • temporal and spatial dimension: when and where was the water used. • three components: green: volume of rainwater consumed. blue: volume of surface or groundwater consumed. grey : volume of polluted water. Water footprint of a business
Operational water footprint Supply-chain water footprint Water footprint directly associated with the production of the business’s product(s) Overhead water footprint Water footprint directly associated with the production of the business product(s) Overhead water footprint  Water incorporated into the product  Water consumed or polluted through a washing process  Water thermally polluted through use for cooling  Water consumption or pollution related to water use in kitchens, toilets, cleaning, gardening, or washing working clothes.  Water footprint of product ingredients bought by the company  Water footprint of other items bought by the company for processing their product  Water footprint of infrastructure (construction materials etc.).  Water footprint of materials and energy for general use (office materials, cars and trucks, fuels, electricity, etc.) Water footprint of a business
[Hoekstra et al., 2009] Water footprint • measures freshwater appropriation • spatial and temporal dimension • actual, locally specific values • always referring to full supply-chain • focus on reducing own water footprint (water use units are not interchangeable) Carbon footprint • measures emission GH-gasses • no spatial / temporal dimension • global average values • supply-chain included only in ‘scope 3 carbon accounting’ • many efforts focused on offsetting (carbon emission units are interchangeable) Water footprint and carbon footprint are complementary tools. Water footprint – Carbon footprint
LCA • measures overall environmental impact • no spatial dimension • weighing water volumes based on impacts [Hoekstra et al., 2009] Water footprint • measures freshwater appropriation • multi-dimensional (type of water use, location, timing) • actual water volumes, no weighing For companies, water footprint assessment and LCA are complementary tools. • WF assessment is a tool to support formulation of a sustainable water management strategy in operations and supply chain. • LCA is a tool to compare the overall environmental impact of different products. WF is a general indicator of water use; application of WF in inventory phase of LCA is one particular application. Water footprint – Life cycle assessment
Water footprint sustainability assessment
Water footprint sustainability assessment Water footprint accounting Water footprint response formulation Setting goals and scope Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Water footprint assessment [Hoekstra et al., 2011]
Water footprint sustainability assessment Sustainability of the cumulative water footprints in different catchments Sustainability of the WFs of specific processes Sustainability of the WFs of specific products Sustainability Sustainability of the of the WF of a WF of a company consumer
Identification and quantification of the primary impacts in the hotspots Identification of hotspots (specific sub-catchments, periods of the year) Identification and quantification of the secondary impacts in the hotspots Identification of the (environmental, social and economic) sustainability criteria Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Assessment of the sustainability of the water footprint within a catchment
Environmental • Environmental flow requirements • Environmental green water requirements • Ambient water quality standards Social • Basic human needs – min. drink-water, food security, employm. • Rules of fairness – fair allocation, water user & water polluter principle Economic • Efficient allocation and use of water Step 1 - Sustainability criteria
Step 2 - Hotspots Environmental sustainability criteria: • Green water footprint < available green water • Blue water footprint < available blue water • Grey water footprint < available assimilation capacity
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Environmental flow requirement, met Environmental flow requirement, not met Blue w ater availability Blue w ater footprint Blue w ater availability Runoff (under undeveloped conditions) m3 /s Runoff Environmental flow requirement [ , ] [ , ] [ , ] blue blue blue WF x t WS x t WA x t  Blue water scarcity: Environmental sustainability criterion: Blue water footprint < blue water availability
1. Catchment level 2. Monthly basis 3. Generic rule of thumb: EFR = 80% of natural runoff, on a monthly basis. 4. Use data from generic global methodology, but replace when better studies give better local estimates Environmental flow requirements
Pollution exceeding the assimilative capacity of the environment Grey water footprint < runoff Assimilative capacity not fully used Full assimilative capacity of the river used Environmental sustainability criterion: Grey water footprint < available assimilation capacity Grey water footprint > runoff Grey water footprint = runoff
Primary impacts • Changes to hydrology • Changes to water quality Secondary impacts • Effects on abundance of certain species • Effects on biodiversity • Effects on human health • Effects on employment • Effects on distribution of welfare • Effects on income in different sectors of economy Steps 3-4 Primary and secondary impacts
Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable Data derived from the product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7%
Data derived from the product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
Data derived from the product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
Data derived from the product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
Global map of where a product or corporate water footprint is located Overlay Global hotspot map Unsustainable components of the product/corporate water footprint
Main producing regions Producing countries Global water footprint of a business located in the Netherlands Water stress (withdrawal-to-availability) < 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.4 - 0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 - 1.0 > 1.0 Hotspot map Water stress (withdrawal-to-availability) < 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.4 - 0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 - 1.0 > 1.0 Main producing regions Hotspots Unsustainable components of the business water footprint
Water footprint response
 Consumers or consumer or environmental organizations push businesses and governments to address water use and impacts along supply chains.  Some businesses act voluntarily in an early stage, driven by consumers or investors.  Governments promote businesses in an early phase and implement regulations in a later phase.  Governments, companies, consultants and accountants use same standard definitions and calculation methods.  International cooperation, through UN and other institutions. Shared responsibility and an incremental approach
Agriculture Industry Green WF Decrease green water footprint (m3 /ton) by increasing green water productivity (ton/m3 ) in both rain-fed and irrigated agriculture. Increase total production from rain-fed agriculture. Not relevant. Blue WF Decrease blue water footprint (m3 /ton) by increasing blue water productivity (ton/m3 ) in irrigated agriculture. Decrease ratio blue/green water footprint. Decrease global blue water footprint (e.g. by 50%). Zero blue water footprint: no losses through evaporation – full recycling – only blue water footprint related to the incorporation of water into a product cannot be avoided. Grey WF Reduced use of artificial fertilisers and pesticides; more effective application. Grey water footprint can go to zero through organic farming. Zero grey water footprint: no pollution – full recycling, recapturing heat from heated effluents and treatment of remaining return flows. The ultimate perspective
Priorities in water footprint reduction Non-hotspots Hotspots Little reduction potential 0 + Large reduction potential + ++
Reduce: • Reduce by avoid: do not undertake water-using activities altogether. • Reduce by improved production: replace one technique by another technique that results in a lower or even zero water footprint Offset: Compensate the residual water footprint by making a reasonable investment in establishing or supporting projects that aim at a sustainable, equitable and efficient use of water in the catchment where the residual water footprint is located. Water footprint reduction and offsetting
Stop waste of ‘blue water’ Towards precision irrigation Full water recycling in industries
Increase water productivity in rain-fed agriculture Make better use of ‘green water’
Grey water footprint  zero Towards organic farming Towards zero emission
Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Consumers Reduction of the direct water footprint:  water saving toilet, shower-head, etc. Reduction of the indirect water footprint:  substitution of a consumer product that has a large water footprint by a different type of product that has a smaller water footprint;  substitution of a consumer product that has a large water footprint by the same product that is derived from another source with smaller water footprint. Ask product transparency from businesses and regulation from governments “Save water in the supermarket”
Transparency along the supply chain Feed crop cultivation Indirect water footprint Direct water footprint Livestock farming Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Food processor Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Retailer Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Consumer Direct water footprint
• Shared terminology & calculation standards • Product transparency – water footprint reporting / disclosure – labelling of products – certification of businesses • Quantitative footprint reduction targets – benchmarking Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Companies
Reduction of the operational water footprint: • water saving in own operations. Reduction of the supply-chain water footprint: • influencing suppliers; • changing to other suppliers; • transform business model in order to incorporate or better control supply chains. Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Companies
Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Investors [Morrison et al., 2009; Pegram et al, 2009; Hoekstra et al., 2011] Reduce risk of investments: • physical risk formed by water shortages or pollution. • risk of damaged corporate image • regulatory risk • financial risk Demand accounting and substantiated quantitative water footprint reduction targets from companies.
Embed water footprint assessment in national water policy making. Promote coherence between water and other governmental policies: environmental, agricultural, energy, trade, foreign policy. Reduce the own organizational water footprint:  reduce the water footprint of public services. Promote product transparency  support or force businesses to make annual water footprint accounts and to implement water footprint reduction measures.  e.g. through promoting a water label for water-intensive products;  e.g. through water-certification of businesses. Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Government
International cooperation  international protocol on water pricing  minimum water rights  tradable water footprint permits  water-labelling of water-intensive products  water-certification of industries and retailers  international nutrient housekeeping  shared guidelines on water-neutrality for businesses
The Water Footprint Network
Mission: Promoting sustainable, equitable and efficient water use through development of shared standards on water footprint accounting and guidelines for the reduction and offsetting of impacts of water footprints. Network: bringing together expertise from academia, businesses, civil society, governments and international organisations. The Water Footprint Network
Founding partners (16 October 2008): International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group) Netherlands Water Partnership UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education University of Twente Water Neutral Foundation World Business Council for Sustainable Development WWF-the global conservation organization The Water Footprint Network
Current partners partners from six continents • universities & research institutions • governmental institutions • non-governmental organisations • large companies • medium and small companies • branche organisations • consultants • accountants • international institutions The Water Footprint Network
 Technical work programme  Water footprint assessment methodology  Data and statistics  Tools and materials, incl. Water footprint assessment tool  Policy work programme  National, regional, local & river-basin WF pilot projects  Corporate and sector WF pilot projects  Product WF studies  Incorporation of the WF in reporting, standards, certification and regulations for the corporate sector  Integration of WF data and statistics into existing global databases Work programme Water Footprint Network (1)
 Training  Face-to-face training courses  E-learning training course  Partner forum  Annual face-to-face forum Stockholm  Online partner forum  Webinars  Working groups  Website  Water footprint calculator  Statistics  Publications Work programme Water Footprint Network (2)
The Water Footprint Assessment Manual Manual Nov. 2009 Manual Feb. 2011
Definitions and method Data & models Practice From definitions and method to practice WF Assessment Manual WF Assessment Tool Databases and models Sector-specific guidelines on the application of the WF
WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt
WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt
WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt

More Related Content

PPT
waterfootprint_comprehensive_introduction_to_water_footprints_en.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Water footprint
byPari Doll
 
PPTX
Water Depletion/Affordability of Food
byBioversity International
 
PDF
Evaluating Water Footprint as a key Indicator in Sustainable Livestock Produc...
bydocparasn25
 
PDF
Water footprint
byvijayathreyan
 
PPT
The water footprint of humanity – the global dimension of water management
byWorld Agroforestry (ICRAF)
 
PPT
The water footprint of livestock products
byILRI
 
PPT
WFP;presentation-hoekstra_kuiper-globwater-11nov081.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
waterfootprint_comprehensive_introduction_to_water_footprints_en.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water footprint
byPari Doll
 
Water Depletion/Affordability of Food
byBioversity International
 
Evaluating Water Footprint as a key Indicator in Sustainable Livestock Produc...
bydocparasn25
 
Water footprint
byvijayathreyan
 
The water footprint of humanity – the global dimension of water management
byWorld Agroforestry (ICRAF)
 
The water footprint of livestock products
byILRI
 
WFP;presentation-hoekstra_kuiper-globwater-11nov081.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 

Similar to WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt

PDF
Principles of Environmental Science-Chapter 8.pdf
bylakwwts2017
 
PDF
Principles of Environmental Science-Chapter 8.pdf
bylakwwts2017
 
PPTX
NATIONAL SERVICE SCHEME NATIONAL GREEN CORPS CLIMATE EDUCATION AND WATER CONS...
byW G Kumar
 
PDF
What is water your water footprint
byArchina Buthiyappan
 
PDF
Water Footprint Assessment Manual Global Water Footprint Standard Guru
byenahsmkwayi25
 
PPT
Water Footprint_1.ppt
byDr. Surajit Chakraborty
 
PPTX
Side event WFN_ Arjen Hoekstra, WFN, 14th January UN Water Conference Zaragoz...
bywater-decade
 
PDF
Water Footprint Assignment
byStephen Leslie
 
PPTX
Water footprint
byAGMSofiUddinMahamud
 
PDF
WATER FOOTPRINT ACCOUNTING FOR CATCHMENTS AND RIVER BASINS
byGlorynel Ojeda-Matos
 
PPTX
"Water footprint"
bywaterborneidentities
 
PPTX
Water footprint
byakanksha dandage
 
PPTX
Water footprint
byShobiya Paramasivam
 
PPT
WFP;Presentation Aldaya FINAL VERSION.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PDF
Waterfootprintformininginsa 111205092849-phpapp02
byMoira Meyer
 
PDF
H2O is the next oil...
byOsnat Lustig
 
PPT
NutritionCamp. Water management and climate change - Luca Ruini
byBarilla Center for Food & Nutrition
 
PDF
Total water footprint of national
bywalled ashwah
 
PPT
WFP;RADKE 2013 Water Footprint 131023.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PDF
IRJET- Water Footprint Analysis of Delhi to Understand it’s Sustainability
byIRJET Journal
 
Principles of Environmental Science-Chapter 8.pdf
bylakwwts2017
 
Principles of Environmental Science-Chapter 8.pdf
bylakwwts2017
 
NATIONAL SERVICE SCHEME NATIONAL GREEN CORPS CLIMATE EDUCATION AND WATER CONS...
byW G Kumar
 
What is water your water footprint
byArchina Buthiyappan
 
Water Footprint Assessment Manual Global Water Footprint Standard Guru
byenahsmkwayi25
 
Water Footprint_1.ppt
byDr. Surajit Chakraborty
 
Side event WFN_ Arjen Hoekstra, WFN, 14th January UN Water Conference Zaragoz...
bywater-decade
 
Water Footprint Assignment
byStephen Leslie
 
Water footprint
byAGMSofiUddinMahamud
 
WATER FOOTPRINT ACCOUNTING FOR CATCHMENTS AND RIVER BASINS
byGlorynel Ojeda-Matos
 
"Water footprint"
bywaterborneidentities
 
Water footprint
byakanksha dandage
 
Water footprint
byShobiya Paramasivam
 
WFP;Presentation Aldaya FINAL VERSION.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Waterfootprintformininginsa 111205092849-phpapp02
byMoira Meyer
 
H2O is the next oil...
byOsnat Lustig
 
NutritionCamp. Water management and climate change - Luca Ruini
byBarilla Center for Food & Nutrition
 
Total water footprint of national
bywalled ashwah
 
WFP;RADKE 2013 Water Footprint 131023.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
IRJET- Water Footprint Analysis of Delhi to Understand it’s Sustainability
byIRJET Journal
 

More from Water Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan

PDF
WFP;Sustainabilityandwater-footprintSWF.pdf
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
Water Footprint Pak
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Water Footprint Studies at UOG; sy.ppt.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
Water FOOTPRINT Studies in UOG, PKs.ppt.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
Assessment of Water Footprint
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
Water Crisis in Pakistan
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Water Footprint Assessment
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WF Studies; Water resources of Pakistan.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Climate Change
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Eco seminar
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WaterFootprint.PK : Scarcity Maps to see
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP.PK' Sustainable living PPT.S - Copy.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP.PK: Molecular Methods biotechPPT1.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Water Footprint Studies UOG, PK3Tppt.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Literature review
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPT
Research Methodology
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP. PK ; Pollutants jamming mrthods PPT3.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP PK; Air Pollution Techniques Air ppt.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP. PK ; Types of Pollution in Soil and Water.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
PPTX
WFP,PK; FOR FURTHER STUDY climate modeling.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP;Sustainabilityandwater-footprintSWF.pdf
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water Footprint Pak
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water Footprint Studies at UOG; sy.ppt.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water FOOTPRINT Studies in UOG, PKs.ppt.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Assessment of Water Footprint
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water Crisis in Pakistan
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water Footprint Assessment
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WF Studies; Water resources of Pakistan.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Climate Change
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Eco seminar
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WaterFootprint.PK : Scarcity Maps to see
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP.PK' Sustainable living PPT.S - Copy.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP.PK: Molecular Methods biotechPPT1.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Water Footprint Studies UOG, PK3Tppt.ppt
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Literature review
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
Research Methodology
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP. PK ; Pollutants jamming mrthods PPT3.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP PK; Air Pollution Techniques Air ppt.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP. PK ; Types of Pollution in Soil and Water.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 
WFP,PK; FOR FURTHER STUDY climate modeling.pptx
byWater Footprint UOG, LUAWMS, UOH, Pakistan
 

Recently uploaded

PPTX
Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation by Rabindra
byRabindraGautam1
 
PPTX
Environmental Laws.pptx about the laws on environment and its issues
byjovitha393
 
PPTX
R. R. Educational Trust's B.Ed. College- Shital Das
byshitaldghv
 
PDF
Measuring Land Management Effects on Soil Dynamic Properties
byMETER Group, Inc. USA
 
PDF
Environmental Sustainability Redefining Growth for a Greener Tomorrow 2025.pdf
bySustainability 99
 
PDF
OECD webinar on pesticide residues (8 October 2025)
byOECD Environment
 
PDF
Why Your Well Pad Surface Keeps Failing—Even After Dust Control or Stabilizat...
byEnvirotac Inc.
 
PPTX
Inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry .pptx
byMSafiurRahman
 
PPTX
Presentación how to plant seeds in school
byJorgeJara72
 
PPTX
Sustainability of Resources
byAmjad Khan Afridi
 
PPTX
Safeguarding the Himalayas from ecological distruction.pptx
byDrSamadKottur
 
PDF
Lecture Haim R Netanya Academic College to IEC Dept.managers
byHaim R. Branisteanu
 
PPT
20. Homeostasis on the plant that important
byHadianaZainalAbidin
 
DOCX
Carbon Steel Tank for Biofuels Tank A strong, economical container for renewa...
byAllenLin596164
 
PDF
Shark Finning and why it needs to be stopped
byzoeehosler
 
PDF
The Sherwin Williams Coastal Color Palette brings
bysanwalali8
 
PPT
Environment Food and safety presentation
byarchanaagarwal35
 
PDF
Global System for Sustainable Development - Lecture 5
byginahif549
 
PPTX
Its all about science SCI7 Q2 W4 summative.pptx
bywowiegsegales
 
PPTX
Co-Op Geog. cover 19.02.2025.pptx ffddfg
bydamianpod7
 
Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation by Rabindra
byRabindraGautam1
 
Environmental Laws.pptx about the laws on environment and its issues
byjovitha393
 
R. R. Educational Trust's B.Ed. College- Shital Das
byshitaldghv
 
Measuring Land Management Effects on Soil Dynamic Properties
byMETER Group, Inc. USA
 
Environmental Sustainability Redefining Growth for a Greener Tomorrow 2025.pdf
bySustainability 99
 
OECD webinar on pesticide residues (8 October 2025)
byOECD Environment
 
Why Your Well Pad Surface Keeps Failing—Even After Dust Control or Stabilizat...
byEnvirotac Inc.
 
Inductively coupled plasma – mass spectrometry .pptx
byMSafiurRahman
 
Presentación how to plant seeds in school
byJorgeJara72
 
Sustainability of Resources
byAmjad Khan Afridi
 
Safeguarding the Himalayas from ecological distruction.pptx
byDrSamadKottur
 
Lecture Haim R Netanya Academic College to IEC Dept.managers
byHaim R. Branisteanu
 
20. Homeostasis on the plant that important
byHadianaZainalAbidin
 
Carbon Steel Tank for Biofuels Tank A strong, economical container for renewa...
byAllenLin596164
 
Shark Finning and why it needs to be stopped
byzoeehosler
 
The Sherwin Williams Coastal Color Palette brings
bysanwalali8
 
Environment Food and safety presentation
byarchanaagarwal35
 
Global System for Sustainable Development - Lecture 5
byginahif549
 
Its all about science SCI7 Q2 W4 summative.pptx
bywowiegsegales
 
Co-Op Geog. cover 19.02.2025.pptx ffddfg
bydamianpod7
 

WaterFootprint-Presentation-GeneralshivaniFILEminimizer.ppt

  • 1.
    www.waterfootprint.org A Comprehensive Introduction toWater Footprints  2011 Arjen Y. Hoekstra Professor in Water Management – University of Twente – the Netherlands Scientific Director – Water Footprint Network
  • 2.
    Overview - Freshwater scarcity& pollution - The water footprint of products - National water footprint accounting - The water footprint of a business - WF sustainability assessment - Response: reducing water footprints - Water Footprint Network
  • 3.
  • 4.
    Coto Doñana NationalPark, southern Spain Strawberries for export Signs of global water scarcity
  • 5.
    Former Aral Sea,Central Asia Cotton for export Signs of global water scarcity
  • 6.
    Signs of globalwater pollution Devecser, Hungary, Oct. 5, 2010
  • 7.
    Signs of globalwater pollution
  • 8.
  • 9.
    ► the volumeof fresh water used to produce the product, summed over the various steps of the production chain. ► when and where the water was used: a water footprint includes a temporal and spatial dimension. The water footprint of a product
  • 10.
    The water footprintof a product Green water footprint ► volume of rainwater evaporated or incorporated into product. Blue water footprint ► volume of surface or groundwater evaporated, incorporated into product or returned to other catchment or the sea. Grey water footprint ► volume of polluted water.
  • 11.
    Direct water footprintIndirect water footprint Green water footprint Green water footprint Blue water footprint Blue water footprint Grey water footprint Grey water footprint Water consumption Water pollution [Hoekstra et al., 2011] Return flow Water withdrawal The traditional statistics on water use Components of a water footprint
  • 12.
    The green andblue water footprint in relation to the water balance of a catchment area Runoff from catchment Ground- and surface water Soil and vegetation Precipitation Non production-related evapotranspiration Production-related evapotranspiration Abstraction Return flow Production-related evapotranspiration Water contained in products Water transfer to other catchment Runoff at field level Green water footprint Blue water footprint Catchment area Water contained in products [Hoekstra et al., 2011]
  • 13.
    Assessing the blueand green process water footprint of growing a crop Water footprint of growing a crop  Crop water use (m3 /ha) / Crop yield (ton/ha) lgp 1 10 green green d CWU ET    lgp 1 10 blue blue d CWU ET   
  • 14.
    Crop water use Greenwater evapotranspiration = min (crop water requirement, effective precipitation) Blue water evapotranspiration = min (irrigation requirement, effective irrigation)
  • 15.
    Crop water requirement 1.Calculate reference crop evapotranspiration ET0 (mm/day) e.g. Penman-Monteith equation 2. Calculate crop evapotranspiration Etc (mm/day) Etc = ET0  Kc where Kc = crop coefficient 3. Calculate crop water requirement CWR (m3 /ha) CWR = Σ Etc [accumulate over growing period]
  • 16.
    Irrigation requirement Irrigation requirement= crop water requirement – effective rainfall
  • 17.
    Grey water footprint •volume of polluted freshwater that associates with the production of a product in its full supply-chain. • calculated as the volume of water that is required to assimilate pollutants based on ambient water quality standards.
  • 18.
    Harvesting Cotton plant Seed-cotton Cottonseed Cotton lint Cotton seed cake Cotton seed oil Grey fabric Fabric Final textile Cotton linters Cotton, not carded or combed Cotton, carded or combed (yarn) Hulling/ extraction Garnetted stock Carding/ Spinning Yarn waste Knitting/ weaving Wet processing Finishing Cotton seed oil, refined Ginning 18 . 0 63 . 0 82 . 0 35 . 0 47 . 0 16 . 0 33 . 0 51 . 0 20 . 0 10 . 0 00 . 1 07 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 99 . 0 95 . 0 10 . 0 05 . 0 00 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 00 . 1 99 . 0 95 . 0 10 . 0 05 . 0 82 . 0 35 . 0 Legend Value fraction Product fraction Production chain cotton
  • 19.
  • 20.
    Blue water footprint Millionm3 /yr 2959M m3 /yr 690 Mm3 /yr 421 Mm3 /yr 2459 Mm3 /yr 803 Mm3 /yr 581 Mm3 /yr 533 Mm3 /yr 450 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on blue water resources [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (blue water)
  • 21.
    283 Mm3 /yr 485 Mm3 /yr 3467 Mm3 /yr 165 Mm3 /yr Green water footprint Millionm3 /yr 186 Mm3 /yr 325 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on green water resources Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (green water) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
  • 22.
    Dilution water footprint Millionm3 /yr 409 Mm3 /yr 310 Mm3 /yr 92 Mm3 /yr 102 Mm3 /yr 635 Mm3 /yr 83 Mm3 /yr 398 Mm3 /yr 697 Mm3 /yr EU25's impact on global water resources due to pollution Water footprint of EU’s cotton consumption (grey water) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
  • 23.
    The water footprint: makinga link between consumption in one place and impacts on water systems elsewhere Shrinking Aral Sea
  • 24.
    The water footprint: makinga link between consumption in one place and impacts on water systems elsewhere [Photo: WWF] Endangered Indus River Dolphin
  • 25.
    [Hoekstra & Chapagain,2008] This is a global average and aggregate number. Policy decisions should be taken on the basis of: 1. Actual water footprint of certain coffee at the precise production location. 2. Ratio green/blue/grey water footprint. 3. Local impacts of the water footprint based on local vulnerability and scarcity.
  • 26.
  • 27.
  • 28.
  • 29.
  • 30.
    [Hoekstra & Chapagain,2008] Food ► 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean, etc) ► 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage, etc) Water ► 24000 litres for drinking ► 7000 litres for servicing. The water footprint of a cow 99% 1%
  • 31.
  • 32.
  • 33.
  • 34.
  • 35.
    Industrial systems Mixed systems Grazingsystems Water footprint: •mostly green •local Water footprint: •green & blue •partly imported Water footprint: •green & blue •local
  • 36.
  • 37.
    Water footprint ofbiofuels from different crops [litre/litre] [Gerbens-Leenes, Hoekstra & Van der Meer, 2009]
  • 38.
  • 39.
    ► the totalvolume of water appropriated for the production of the goods and services consumed. ► equal to the sum of the water footprints of all goods and services consumed. ► dimensions of a water footprint • volume • where and when • type of water use: green, blue, grey Water footprint of a consumer
  • 40.
    The total waterfootprint of a consumer in the UK ► about 3% of your water footprint is at home. 150 litre/day ► about 60 to 65% of your water footprint lies abroad. ► about 97% of your water footprint is ‘invisible’, it is related to the products you buy in the supermarket. 3400 litre/day for agricultural products 1100 litre/day for industrial products
  • 41.
    Meat versus vegetariandiet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
  • 42.
    Meat versus vegetariandiet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
  • 43.
    Meat versus vegetariandiet Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Industrial countries Animal origin 950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750 Vegetable origin 2450 0.5 1225 Vegetable origin 3100 0.5 1550 Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300 Developing countries Animal origin 350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500 Vegetable origin 2350 0.5 1175 Vegetable origin 2500 0.5 1250 Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
  • 44.
  • 45.
    ► total amountof water that is used to produce the goods and services consumed by the inhabitants of the nation. ► two components: • internal water footprint – inside the country. • external water footprint – in other countries. Water footprint of national consumption ► water footprint of national consumption = water footprint within the nation + virtual water import – virtual water export
  • 46.
    Consumption Export Production Import Internal water footprint External water footprint WF of national consumpt. Water use forexport Virtual water import for re- export Virtual water export + + = = WF within nation Virtual water import + + = = Virtual water budget + + = = National water use accounting framework The traditional statistics on water use, but then limited to withdrawals
  • 47.
    Country/region National waterfootprint (Gm3 /year) from the perspective of production from the perspective of consumption Australia 91 27 Canada 123 63 China 893 883 Egypt 59 70 EU25 559 744 India 1013 987 Japan 54 146 Jordan 1.8 6.3 USA 750 696 [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008] WF of national consumption WF within a nation Traditional statistics on water use, but then restricted to water withdrawal
  • 48.
    Arrows show tradeflows >10 Gm3 /yr Regional virtual water balances (only agricultural trade) [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
  • 49.
    0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 China India Japan Pakistan Indonesia Brazil Mexico Russia Nigeria Thailand Italy USA Water footprint (m 3 /cap/yr) Domestic water consumptionIndustrial goods Agricultural goods Water footprint per capita Global average water footprint [Hoekstra & Chapagain, 2008]
  • 50.
    1. Consumption characteristics Consumption volume  Consumption pattern 2. Production circumstances  Climate: evaporative demand at place of production  Agricultural practice: water use efficiency Major determinants of the water footprint of national consumption
  • 51.
    The water footprintof a business
  • 52.
    Water risks forbusiness • Physical risk • Reputational risk • Regulatory risk • Financial risk Water opportunity for business • frontrunner advantage • corporate image Corporate social responsibility Water footprint: why businesses are interested
  • 53.
    Operational water footprint •the direct water use by the producer – for producing, manufacturing or for supporting activities. Supply-chain water footprint • the indirect water use in the producer’s supply chain. Water footprint of a business
  • 54.
    • From operationsto supply-chain thinking. • Shifting focus from water withdrawals to consumptive water use. • From securing the ‘right to abstract & emit’ to assessing the full range of economic, social and environmental impacts of water use in space and time. • From meeting emission standards to managing grey water footprint. Water footprint: what’s new for business
  • 55.
    The water footprintof a consumer Indirect WF Direct WF blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Consumer blue water use grey water [Hoekstra, 2008]
  • 56.
    The water footprintof a retailer blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Supply chain WF Operational WF Consumer blue water use grey water End-use WF of a product [Hoekstra, 2008] The traditional statistics on corporate water use
  • 57.
    The water footprintof a food processor blue water use grey water Farmer Retailer Food processer Virtual water flow Virtual water flow Virtual water flow green and blue water use blue water use grey water grey water Supply chain WF Operational WF Consumer blue water use grey water End-use WF of a product [Hoekstra, 2008] The traditional statistics on corporate water use
  • 58.
    • total volumeof freshwater that is used directly and indirectly to run and support a business. • temporal and spatial dimension: when and where was the water used. • three components: green: volume of rainwater consumed. blue: volume of surface or groundwater consumed. grey : volume of polluted water. Water footprint of a business
  • 59.
    Operational water footprintSupply-chain water footprint Water footprint directly associated with the production of the business’s product(s) Overhead water footprint Water footprint directly associated with the production of the business product(s) Overhead water footprint  Water incorporated into the product  Water consumed or polluted through a washing process  Water thermally polluted through use for cooling  Water consumption or pollution related to water use in kitchens, toilets, cleaning, gardening, or washing working clothes.  Water footprint of product ingredients bought by the company  Water footprint of other items bought by the company for processing their product  Water footprint of infrastructure (construction materials etc.).  Water footprint of materials and energy for general use (office materials, cars and trucks, fuels, electricity, etc.) Water footprint of a business
  • 60.
    [Hoekstra et al.,2009] Water footprint • measures freshwater appropriation • spatial and temporal dimension • actual, locally specific values • always referring to full supply-chain • focus on reducing own water footprint (water use units are not interchangeable) Carbon footprint • measures emission GH-gasses • no spatial / temporal dimension • global average values • supply-chain included only in ‘scope 3 carbon accounting’ • many efforts focused on offsetting (carbon emission units are interchangeable) Water footprint and carbon footprint are complementary tools. Water footprint – Carbon footprint
  • 61.
    LCA • measures overallenvironmental impact • no spatial dimension • weighing water volumes based on impacts [Hoekstra et al., 2009] Water footprint • measures freshwater appropriation • multi-dimensional (type of water use, location, timing) • actual water volumes, no weighing For companies, water footprint assessment and LCA are complementary tools. • WF assessment is a tool to support formulation of a sustainable water management strategy in operations and supply chain. • LCA is a tool to compare the overall environmental impact of different products. WF is a general indicator of water use; application of WF in inventory phase of LCA is one particular application. Water footprint – Life cycle assessment
  • 62.
  • 63.
    Water footprint sustainability assessment Water footprint accounting Waterfootprint response formulation Setting goals and scope Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Water footprint assessment [Hoekstra et al., 2011]
  • 64.
    Water footprint sustainabilityassessment Sustainability of the cumulative water footprints in different catchments Sustainability of the WFs of specific processes Sustainability of the WFs of specific products Sustainability Sustainability of the of the WF of a WF of a company consumer
  • 65.
    Identification and quantification ofthe primary impacts in the hotspots Identification of hotspots (specific sub-catchments, periods of the year) Identification and quantification of the secondary impacts in the hotspots Identification of the (environmental, social and economic) sustainability criteria Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Assessment of the sustainability of the water footprint within a catchment
  • 66.
    Environmental • Environmental flowrequirements • Environmental green water requirements • Ambient water quality standards Social • Basic human needs – min. drink-water, food security, employm. • Rules of fairness – fair allocation, water user & water polluter principle Economic • Efficient allocation and use of water Step 1 - Sustainability criteria
  • 67.
    Step 2 -Hotspots Environmental sustainability criteria: • Green water footprint < available green water • Blue water footprint < available blue water • Grey water footprint < available assimilation capacity
  • 68.
    0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Jan Feb MarApr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Environmental flow requirement, met Environmental flow requirement, not met Blue w ater availability Blue w ater footprint Blue w ater availability Runoff (under undeveloped conditions) m3 /s Runoff Environmental flow requirement [ , ] [ , ] [ , ] blue blue blue WF x t WS x t WA x t  Blue water scarcity: Environmental sustainability criterion: Blue water footprint < blue water availability
  • 69.
    1. Catchment level 2.Monthly basis 3. Generic rule of thumb: EFR = 80% of natural runoff, on a monthly basis. 4. Use data from generic global methodology, but replace when better studies give better local estimates Environmental flow requirements
  • 70.
    Pollution exceeding the assimilative capacityof the environment Grey water footprint < runoff Assimilative capacity not fully used Full assimilative capacity of the river used Environmental sustainability criterion: Grey water footprint < available assimilation capacity Grey water footprint > runoff Grey water footprint = runoff
  • 71.
    Primary impacts • Changesto hydrology • Changes to water quality Secondary impacts • Effects on abundance of certain species • Effects on biodiversity • Effects on human health • Effects on employment • Effects on distribution of welfare • Effects on income in different sectors of economy Steps 3-4 Primary and secondary impacts
  • 72.
    Example of howto assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable Data derived from the product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7%
  • 73.
    Data derived fromthe product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
  • 74.
    Data derived fromthe product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
  • 75.
    Data derived fromthe product water footprint account Check geographic sustainability of the process Check sustainability of the process in itself Conclusion Check relevance from product perspective Check whether response is required Process step Catchment in which the process is located Water footprint (m3 per unit of final product) Is the catchment a hotspot? Can the water footprint be reduced or avoided altogether? Is this a sustainable component in the product water footprint? Fraction of the product water footprint that is not sustainable Share above threshold of one percent Is this a priority component? 1 A 45 no no yes yes no B 35 yes yes no 35% yes yes 2 A 10 no no yes yes no 3 C 6 no no yes yes no D 2 yes no no 2% yes yes E 1.1 no yes no 1.1% yes yes 4 F 0.5 yes no no 0.5% no no 5 A 0.3 no no yes no no 6 A 0.1 no yes no 0.1% no no total 100 38.7% Example of how to assess the extent to which the water footprint of a product is sustainable
  • 76.
    Global map ofwhere a product or corporate water footprint is located Overlay Global hotspot map Unsustainable components of the product/corporate water footprint
  • 77.
    Main producing regions Producingcountries Global water footprint of a business located in the Netherlands Water stress (withdrawal-to-availability) < 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.4 - 0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 - 1.0 > 1.0 Hotspot map Water stress (withdrawal-to-availability) < 0.3 0.3 - 0.4 0.4 - 0.5 0.5 - 0.6 0.6 - 0.7 0.7 - 0.8 0.8 - 0.9 0.9 - 1.0 > 1.0 Main producing regions Hotspots Unsustainable components of the business water footprint
  • 78.
  • 79.
     Consumers orconsumer or environmental organizations push businesses and governments to address water use and impacts along supply chains.  Some businesses act voluntarily in an early stage, driven by consumers or investors.  Governments promote businesses in an early phase and implement regulations in a later phase.  Governments, companies, consultants and accountants use same standard definitions and calculation methods.  International cooperation, through UN and other institutions. Shared responsibility and an incremental approach
  • 80.
    Agriculture Industry Green WFDecrease green water footprint (m3 /ton) by increasing green water productivity (ton/m3 ) in both rain-fed and irrigated agriculture. Increase total production from rain-fed agriculture. Not relevant. Blue WF Decrease blue water footprint (m3 /ton) by increasing blue water productivity (ton/m3 ) in irrigated agriculture. Decrease ratio blue/green water footprint. Decrease global blue water footprint (e.g. by 50%). Zero blue water footprint: no losses through evaporation – full recycling – only blue water footprint related to the incorporation of water into a product cannot be avoided. Grey WF Reduced use of artificial fertilisers and pesticides; more effective application. Grey water footprint can go to zero through organic farming. Zero grey water footprint: no pollution – full recycling, recapturing heat from heated effluents and treatment of remaining return flows. The ultimate perspective
  • 81.
    Priorities in waterfootprint reduction Non-hotspots Hotspots Little reduction potential 0 + Large reduction potential + ++
  • 82.
    Reduce: • Reduce byavoid: do not undertake water-using activities altogether. • Reduce by improved production: replace one technique by another technique that results in a lower or even zero water footprint Offset: Compensate the residual water footprint by making a reasonable investment in establishing or supporting projects that aim at a sustainable, equitable and efficient use of water in the catchment where the residual water footprint is located. Water footprint reduction and offsetting
  • 83.
    Stop waste of‘blue water’ Towards precision irrigation Full water recycling in industries
  • 84.
  • 85.
    Grey water footprint zero Towards organic farming Towards zero emission
  • 86.
    Reducing humanity’s waterfootprint – Consumers Reduction of the direct water footprint:  water saving toilet, shower-head, etc. Reduction of the indirect water footprint:  substitution of a consumer product that has a large water footprint by a different type of product that has a smaller water footprint;  substitution of a consumer product that has a large water footprint by the same product that is derived from another source with smaller water footprint. Ask product transparency from businesses and regulation from governments “Save water in the supermarket”
  • 87.
    Transparency along thesupply chain Feed crop cultivation Indirect water footprint Direct water footprint Livestock farming Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Food processor Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Retailer Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint Consumer Direct water footprint
  • 88.
    • Shared terminology& calculation standards • Product transparency – water footprint reporting / disclosure – labelling of products – certification of businesses • Quantitative footprint reduction targets – benchmarking Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Companies
  • 89.
    Reduction of theoperational water footprint: • water saving in own operations. Reduction of the supply-chain water footprint: • influencing suppliers; • changing to other suppliers; • transform business model in order to incorporate or better control supply chains. Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Companies
  • 90.
    Reducing humanity’s waterfootprint – Investors [Morrison et al., 2009; Pegram et al, 2009; Hoekstra et al., 2011] Reduce risk of investments: • physical risk formed by water shortages or pollution. • risk of damaged corporate image • regulatory risk • financial risk Demand accounting and substantiated quantitative water footprint reduction targets from companies.
  • 91.
    Embed water footprintassessment in national water policy making. Promote coherence between water and other governmental policies: environmental, agricultural, energy, trade, foreign policy. Reduce the own organizational water footprint:  reduce the water footprint of public services. Promote product transparency  support or force businesses to make annual water footprint accounts and to implement water footprint reduction measures.  e.g. through promoting a water label for water-intensive products;  e.g. through water-certification of businesses. Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Government
  • 92.
    International cooperation  internationalprotocol on water pricing  minimum water rights  tradable water footprint permits  water-labelling of water-intensive products  water-certification of industries and retailers  international nutrient housekeeping  shared guidelines on water-neutrality for businesses
  • 93.
  • 94.
    Mission: Promoting sustainable,equitable and efficient water use through development of shared standards on water footprint accounting and guidelines for the reduction and offsetting of impacts of water footprints. Network: bringing together expertise from academia, businesses, civil society, governments and international organisations. The Water Footprint Network
  • 95.
    Founding partners (16October 2008): International Finance Corporation (World Bank Group) Netherlands Water Partnership UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education University of Twente Water Neutral Foundation World Business Council for Sustainable Development WWF-the global conservation organization The Water Footprint Network
  • 96.
    Current partners partners fromsix continents • universities & research institutions • governmental institutions • non-governmental organisations • large companies • medium and small companies • branche organisations • consultants • accountants • international institutions The Water Footprint Network
  • 97.
     Technical workprogramme  Water footprint assessment methodology  Data and statistics  Tools and materials, incl. Water footprint assessment tool  Policy work programme  National, regional, local & river-basin WF pilot projects  Corporate and sector WF pilot projects  Product WF studies  Incorporation of the WF in reporting, standards, certification and regulations for the corporate sector  Integration of WF data and statistics into existing global databases Work programme Water Footprint Network (1)
  • 98.
     Training  Face-to-facetraining courses  E-learning training course  Partner forum  Annual face-to-face forum Stockholm  Online partner forum  Webinars  Working groups  Website  Water footprint calculator  Statistics  Publications Work programme Water Footprint Network (2)
  • 99.
    The Water FootprintAssessment Manual Manual Nov. 2009 Manual Feb. 2011
  • 100.
    Definitions and method Data &models Practice From definitions and method to practice WF Assessment Manual WF Assessment Tool Databases and models Sector-specific guidelines on the application of the WF

Editor's Notes

  • #1 Copyright by Arjen Y. Hoekstra, 2011. The presentation can be freely used for educational purposes, but not for commercial purposes. When using this presentation or pieces from it, due credit should be given to the author. Useful background publications: * Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. * Hoekstra, A.Y. and Chapagain, A.K. (2008) Globalization of water: Sharing the planet's freshwater resources, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK.
  • #9 The water footprint of a product (a commodity, good or service) is the total volume of freshwater used to produce the product, summed over the various steps of the production chain. The water footprint of a product refers not only to the total volume of water used; it also refers to where and when the water is used. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 195.
  • #10 Green water footprint – Volume of rainwater consumed during the production process. This is particularly relevant for agricultural and forestry products (products based on crops or wood), where it refers to the total rainwater evapotranspiration (from fields and plantations) plus the water incorporated into the harvested crop or wood. Blue water footprint – Volume of surface and groundwater consumed as a result of the production of a good or service. Consumption refers to the volume of freshwater used and then evaporated or incorporated into a product. It also includes water abstracted from surface or groundwater in a catchment and returned to another catchment or the sea. It is the amount of water abstracted from groundwater or surface water that does not return to the catchment from which it was withdrawn. Grey water footprint – The grey water footprint of a product is an indicator of freshwater pollution that can be associated with the production of a product over its full supply chain. It is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants based on natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. It is calculated as the volume of water that is required to dilute pollutants to such an extent that the quality of the water remains above agreed water quality standards. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 187, 189, 190.
  • #11 Water footprint – The water footprint is an indicator of freshwater use that looks at both direct and indirect water use of a consumer or producer. Green water footprint – Volume of rainwater consumed during the production process. This is particularly relevant for agricultural and forestry products (products based on crops or wood), where it refers to the total rainwater evapotranspiration (from fields and plantations) plus the water incorporated into the harvested crop or wood. Blue water footprint – Volume of surface and groundwater consumed as a result of the production of a good or service. Consumption refers to the volume of freshwater used and then evaporated or incorporated into a product. It also includes water abstracted from surface or groundwater in a catchment and returned to another catchment or the sea. It is the amount of water abstracted from groundwater or surface water that does not return to the catchment from which it was withdrawn. Grey water footprint – The grey water footprint of a product is an indicator of freshwater pollution that can be associated with the production of a product over its full supply chain. It is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants based on natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. It is calculated as the volume of water that is required to dilute pollutants to such an extent that the quality of the water remains above agreed water quality standards. As an indicator of ‘water use’, the water footprint differs from the classical measure of ‘water withdrawal’ in three respects: 1. It does not include blue water use, in so far as this water is returned to where it came from. 2. It is not restricted to blue water use, but also includes green and grey water. 3. It is not restricted to direct water use, but also includes indirect water use. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 3.
  • #12 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #13 The water footprint (m3/ton) of primary crops can be calculated as the crop water use at field level (m3/ha) divided by the crop yield (ton/ha). The crop water use depends on the crop water requirement on the one hand and the actual soil water available on the other hand. When a primary crop is processed into a crop product (e.g. paddy rice processed into brown rice), the water footprint of the processed product is calculated by dividing the water footprint of the primary product by the so-called product fraction (i.e. the weight of crop product in ton obtained per ton of primary crop). If a primary crop is processed into two different products or more (for example soybean processed into soybean flour and soybean oil), we need to distribute the water footprint of the primary crop to its products. We do this proportionally to the value of the crop products.
  • #14 Green water use refers to the volume of rainwater that evaporates from a crop field during the growing period. Blue water use refers to the volume of irrigation water (withdrawn from surface or ground water) that evaporates from a crop field during the growing period. The distinction between green and blue water has been introduced by Malin Falkenmark, Swedish hydrologist.
  • #15 The water requirement of a crop can be estimated based on climate data (like temperature, wind speed, etc.) and crop characteristics. Various models are available to estimate crop water requirements. A common model is the CropWat model of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), which is freely available online. Photo: wheat field.
  • #16 When rainfall does not meet the crop water requirement, the gap is the irrigation water requirement. When the irrigation water requirement is supplied indeed, growing conditions are optimal (provided that other factors like nutrient availability are optimal as well). If the irrigation requirement is not met or only partly, the yield is likely to be lower than optimal. The yield reduction depends on the volumes and timing of the water shortages. Picture: Pivot irrigation on cotton.
  • #17 The grey water footprint of a product of freshwater pollution that can be associated with the production over its full supply chain. It is defined as the volume of freshwater to assimilate the load of pollutants based on natural background and existing ambient water quality standards. It is calculated water that is required to dilute pollutants to such an extent the water remains above agreed water quality standards. Source of photo: Cunningham et al. (2003) p.448-456
  • #18 A cotton shirt is made from cotton fabric, which is made from combed or carded cotton, which is derived from cotton lint, which comes from seed cotton, which is harvested from the cotton field. Indeed, before the final cotton textile reaches to the hands of a consumer it passes through a number of intermediate processes and products. First the seed cotton is processed into lint (we get only 350 kg of lint out of 1000 kg of seed cotton), then after carding, spinning and weaving we get grey fabric (1000 kg of lint produces only 900 kg of grey fabric), then it goes to the wet processing (bleaching and dying) and finishes as final printed cotton textile. It requires about 30 m3 per ton for bleaching, 140 m3 per ton for dying and 190 m3 per ton for printing. The average water footprint of printed cotton (for example a pair of jeans weighing 1 kilogram) is 11000 litres per kilogram. Source: Chapagain, A.K., Hoekstra, A.Y., Savenije, H.H.G. and Gautam, R. (2006) The water footprint of cotton consumption: An assessment of the impact of worldwide consumption of cotton products on the water resources in the cotton producing countries, Ecological Economics. 60(1): 186-203.
  • #19 Water footprint: 2700 litres for 1 cotton shirt. In order to get 1 kg of final cotton textile, one requires 11,000 litres of water (as a global average). Thus, when we have a shirt with a weight of 250 gram, this shirt costs 2700 litres. Of this total water volume, 45% is irrigation water consumed (evaporated) by the cotton plant; 41% is rainwater evaporated from the cotton field during the growing period; and 14% is water required to dilute the wastewater flows that result from the use of fertilisers in the field and the use of chemicals in the textile industry. Globally, the annual cotton production evaporates 210 billion cubic meters of water and pollutes 50 billion cubic meters of water. This is 3.5 % of the global water use for crop production.
  • #20 The water footprint has a spatial dimension, so it can be mapped. A water footprint map shows the volumes of water used at various locations, for example the water used worldwide to make the products consumed by a given community. The impact of consumption of cotton products by citizens in EU25 on the world’s water resources (million m3/yr). Period 1997-2001. This slide shows the blue water footprint, i.e. the volume of irrigation water evaporated. Source: Hoekstra and Chapagain (2008), map 15.
  • #21 This slide shows the green water footprint related to EU’s cotton consumption, i.e. the volumes of rainwater evaporated for crop growth.
  • #22 This slide shows the gray water footprint related to EU’s cotton consumption, i.e. the volumes of water polluted because of cotton production and processing.
  • #23 Water use for cotton production can have major impacts on the environment. Particularly intensive irrigation schemes can have disastrous effects, as shown for example in the case of Uzbekistan and the desiccation of the Aral Sea.
  • #24 The Indus River dolphin (Platanista minor) is one of the world's rarest mammals and the second most endangered freshwater river dolphin. Approximately 1,100 specimens of this species exist today in a small fraction of their former range, the lower reaches of the Indus River in Pakistan. However, the population of this species has gradually declined because of various factors, including water pollution, poaching, fragmentation of habitat due to barrages, and dolphin strandings in the irrigation canals. (Source: WWF). Pollution (pesticide runoff) from mainly cotton. Yangtze dolphin extinct, Indus severely threatened. Water for people and nature requires management which focuses on multiple needs of systems. WF analysis allows us to trace supply and identify impacts. It gives clear steer on risk and responsibility.
  • #25 It costs about 21,000 litres of water to produce 1 kg of roasted coffee. For a standard cup of coffee we require 7 gram of roasted coffee, so that a cup of coffee costs 140 litres of water. Assuming that a standard cup of coffee is 125 ml, we thus need more than 1100 drops of water for producing one drop of coffee. Drinking tea instead of coffee would save a lot of water. For a standard cup of tea of 250 ml we require 30 litres of water.
  • #26 The water footprint of pure chocolate is 2400 litres for a 100-gram bar (as a world average!). Composition of dark chocolate: 40% cocoa paste (water footprint 33260 litres/kg); 20% cocoa butter (water footprint 50730 litres/kg); 40% sugar (water footprint 1526 litres/kg). We then can calculate: 40% 33260 + 20% 50730 + 40% 1526 = 24060 litres/kg = 2400 liters for one 100gr chocolate bar. The water footprint of milk powder is 4600 litres/kg, so that milk chocolate will have a bit larger water footprint (about 2500 litres for one 100gr chocolate bar) than dark chocolate when total cocoa content remains the same. Most crucial for the water footprint of chocolate is the cocoa paste and cocoa butter content.
  • #27 For 1 kg of refined sugar from SUGAR CANE we require about 1500 litres of water. Sugar cane consumes about 220 billion cubic meters of water annually, which is 3.4 % of the global water use for crop production. Sugar from sugar beets requires less water per kg.
  • #30 The water footprint of a beef cow is 3,100,000 litres. In an industrial beef production system, it takes in average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef. The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing. This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing). Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water in average.
  • #31 The water footprint of a beef cow is 3,100,000 litres. In an industrial beef production system, it takes in average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef. The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing. This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing). Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water in average.
  • #32 The water footprint of beef is 15500 litres of water per kg of beef.
  • #33 The major part of the water footprint of a hamburger refers to the water needed to make the feed for the cow.
  • #34 The water footprint of a piece of beef depends on how it was produced, e.g. composition of animal feed, origin of the feed ingredients. Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
  • #35 Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
  • #36 Water footprint: 10 litres of water for one A4-sheet of paper. We assume here eighty-grams paper (80g/m2). Further we assume that the paper is produced from wood. Sources: Hoekstra, A.Y. and Chapagain, A.K. (2008) Globalization of water: Sharing the planet's freshwater resources, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK. Van Oel, P.R. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green and blue water footprint of paper products: methodological considerations and quantification, Value of Water Research Report Series No.46, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
  • #37 Source: Gerbens-Leenes, W., Hoekstra, A.Y. and Van der Meer, T.H. (2009) The water footprint of bioenergy, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106 (25): 10219-10223.
  • #41 Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
  • #42 Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
  • #43 Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
  • #45 The ‘water footprint of national consumption’ is defined as the total amount of fresh water that is used to produce the goods and services consumed by the inhabitants of the nation. Part of this water footprint lies outside the territory of the nation. The term should not be confused with the ‘water footprint within a nation’, which refers to the total freshwater volume consumed or polluted within the territory of the nation. Internal water footprint of national consumption – The part of the water footprint of national consumption that falls inside the nation, in other words, the appropriation of domestic water resources for producing goods and services that are consumed domestically. External water footprint of national consumption – The part of the water footprint of national consumption that falls outside the nation considered. It refers to the appropriation of water resources in other nations for the production of goods and services that are imported into and consumed within the nation considered. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Pages 189, 190, 195.
  • #46 The internal water footprint is the water use within the country in so far it is used to produce goods and services consumed by the national population. The external water footprint of a country is the annual volume of water resources used in other countries to produce goods and services imported into and consumed in the country considered. It is equal to the virtual-water import into the country minus the volume of virtual-water exported to other countries as a result of re-export of imported products. The virtual-water export consists of exported water of domestic origin and re-exported water of foreign origin. The virtual-water import will partly be consumed, thus constituting the external water footprint of the country, and partly be re-exported. The sum of virtual water import and water use within a country is equal to the sum of the virtual water export and the country’s water footprint. This sum is called the virtual-water budget of a country. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #47 The water footprint indicator (that looks at water use related to domestic consumption) gives another sort of information than the traditional water use statistics (that look at water use related to domestic production).
  • #48 Regional virtual-water balances and net interregional virtual-water flows related to trade in agricultural products. Only the biggest net flows (>10 billion m3/yr) are shown. Period 1997-2001. Source: Hoekstra and Chapagain (2008), map 2.
  • #49 USA has a large water footprint because of the high consumption level. Nigeria and Thailand have a large water footprint because of inefficient water use (large water use per unit of product). Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. and Chapagain, A.K. (2008) Globalization of water: Sharing the planet's freshwater resources, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK. Page 60.
  • #52 For many companies, fresh water is a basic ingredient for their operations, while effluents may lead to pollution of the local water system. Initially, public pressure has been the most important reason for sustainability initiatives in businesses. Today, however, many companies recognize that failure to manage the issue of fresh water raises different sorts of business risk, including damage to the corporate image, threat of increased regulatory control, financial risks caused by pollution, and insufficient freshwater availability for operations. A number of multinationals recognise now that proactive management can avoid risks and contribute to their profitability and competitiveness. Business water footprint accounting is increasingly regarded as an essential part of sustainable corporate performance accounting. An increasing number of businesses recognize that not only their operations, but also their supplies depend and impact on natural water systems.
  • #53 The water footprint of a business – which can also be called alternatively corporate or organizational water footprint – is defined as the total volume of freshwater that is used directly and indirectly to run and support a business. The water footprint of a business consists of two components: the direct water use by the producer (for producing/manufacturing or for supporting activities) and the indirect water use (the water use in the producer’s supply chain). The ‘water footprint of a business’ is the same as the total ‘water footprint of the business output products’. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 194.
  • #54 • Companies have traditionally focused on water use in their operations, not in their supply chain. The water footprint does take an integrated approach. Most companies will discover that their supply chain water footprint is much larger than their operational water footprint. As a result, companies may conclude that it is more cost-effective to shift investments from efforts to reduce their operational water use to efforts to reduce their supply chain water footprint and associated risks. • Companies have traditionally looked at reduction of water withdrawals. The water footprint shows water use in terms of consumption rather than it terms if withdrawal. Return flows can be reused, so it makes sense to specifically look at consumptive water use. • Companies make sure that they have a water use right or licence. Possessing that is not sufficient to manage water-related risks. It is useful to look into the spatiotemporal details of a company’s water footprint, because details on where and when water is used can be used as input to a detailed water footprint sustainability assessment, to identify the environmental, social and economic impacts and to find out associated business risks. • Companies have traditionally looked at meeting emission standards (effluent standards). The grey water footprint looks at the required water volume for assimilating waste based on ambient water quality standards. Meeting emission standards is one thing, but looking at how effluents actually result in reduced assimilation capacity of ambient freshwater bodies and at business risks associated to that is another. Meeting effluent standards (which are formulated in terms of concentrations) can easily be done by taking in more water in order to dilute the effluent before disposal. Diluting effluents may be helpful in meeting effluent standards, but not in reducing the grey water footprint, because the latter is related to the total load of chemicals added to the environment, not the concentration of chemicals in the effluent. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 66.
  • #58 The water footprint of a business – which can also be called alternatively corporate or organizational water footprint – is defined as the total volume of freshwater that is used directly and indirectly to run and support a business. The water footprint of a business consists of two components: the direct water use by the producer (for producing/manufacturing or for supporting activities) and the indirect water use (the water use in the producer’s supply chain). The ‘water footprint of a business’ is the same as the total ‘water footprint of the business output products’. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 194.
  • #59 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #60 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #61 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #63 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 4.
  • #64 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 73, 75.
  • #65 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 76.
  • #66 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 77-88.
  • #67 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 78-87.
  • #68 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 83.
  • #69 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 151-154.
  • #70 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 86-87.
  • #71 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 88-89.
  • #72 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 93.
  • #73 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 93.
  • #74 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 93.
  • #75 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 93.
  • #77 Water scarcity level by basin taking into account environmental water requirements. The index is calculated by dividing the water withdrawal in a certain area by the total runoff in that area lessened by the environmental water requirements. Source: Smakhtin, V., Revenga, C., and Döll, P. (2004) Taking into account environmental water requirements in global-scale water resources assessments, Comprehensive Assessment Research Report 2, IWMI, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
  • #80 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 101.
  • #81 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 103.
  • #84 Photo: wheat field.
  • #86 Consumers can reduce their direct water footprint (home water use) by installing water-saving toilets, applying a water-saving showerhead, turning off the tap during teeth-brushing, using less water in the garden and by not disposing of medicines, paints or other pollutants through the sink. The indirect water footprint of a consumer is generally much larger than the direct one. A consumer has basically two options to reduce his or her indirect water footprint. One option is to change the consumption pattern by substituting a specific consumer product that has a large water footprint by another type of product that has a smaller water footprint. Examples include: eating less meat or becoming vegetarian, drinking plain water instead of coffee, or wearing less cotton and more artificial fibre clothes. This approach has limitations, because many people do not easily shift from eating meat to being vegetarian and people like their coffee and cotton. A second option is to select the cotton, beef or coffee that has a relatively low water footprint or that has its footprint in an area that does not have high water scarcity. This requires, however, that consumers have the proper information to make that choice. Since this information is generally not easily available, an important thing consumers can do now is ask product transparency from businesses and regulation from governments. When information is available on the impacts of a certain article on the water system, consumers can make conscious choices about what they buy. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 106.
  • #87 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK.
  • #88 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 106-108.
  • #89 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 106-108.
  • #90 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 109.
  • #91 Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 110-113.
  • #92 Sources: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2006) ‘The global dimension of water governance: Nine reasons for global arrangements in order to cope with local water problems’ Value of Water Research Report Series No.20, UNESCO-IHE. Hoekstra, A.Y. (2008) Water neutral: reducing and offsetting the impacts of water footprints, Value of Water Research Report Series No.28, UNESCO-IHE. Verkerk, M.P., Hoekstra, A.Y. and Gerbens-Leenes, P.W. (2008) Global water governance: Conceptual design of global institutional arrangements, Value of Water Research Report Series No.26, UNESCO-IHE. Hoekstra, A.Y. (2011) 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, 3(1):21-46.
  • #94 http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/WFN-mission
  • #96 http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/OverviewPartners
  • #97 http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/WorkProgrammes
  • #98 http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/WorkProgrammes
  • #99 Water footprint: one global standard A shared standard on definitions and calculation methods is crucial given the rapidly growing interest in companies and governments to use water footprint accounts as a basis for formulating sustainable water strategies and policies. The water footprint is an effective tool only when used in a rigid manner, not when used as a metaphor. The water footprint calculation standard is contained in the Water Footprint Manual. This manual is regularly updated in order to follow new developments
  • #101 Feel free to go to the water footprint website, find much more info and freely download publications.
  • #102 Find the water footprint of various products in the Product Gallery on the water footprint website.
  • #103 Calculate your own water footprint at www.waterfootprint.org