Water footprinting of pasture-based farms; beef and sheep

In the context of water use for agricultural production, water footprints (WFs) have become an important sustainability indicator. To understand better the water demand for beef and sheep meat produced on pasture-based systems, a WF of individual farms is required. The main objective of this study was to determine the primary contributors to freshwater consumption up to the farm gate expressed as a volumetric WF and associated impacts for the production of 1 kg of beef and 1 kg of sheep meat from a selection of pasture-based farms for 2 consecutive years, 2014 and 2015. The WF included green water, from the consumption of soil moisture due to evapotranspiration, and blue water, from the consumption of ground and surface waters. The impact of freshwater consumption on global water stress from the production of beef and sheep meat in Ireland was also computed. The average WF of the beef farms was 8391 l/kg carcass weight (CW) of which 8222 l/kg CW was green water and 169 l/kg CW was blue water; water for the production of pasture (including silage and grass) contributed 88% to the WF, concentrate production – 10% and on-farm water use – 1%. The average stress-weighted WF of beef was 91 l H₂O eq/kg CW, implying that each kg of beef produced in Ireland contributed to freshwater scarcity equivalent to the consumption of 91 l of freshwater by an average world citizen. The average WF of the sheep farms was 7672 l/kg CW of which 7635 l/kg CW was green water and 37 l/kg CW was blue water; water for the production of pasture contributed 87% to the WF, concentrate production – 12% and on-farm water use – 1%. The average stress-weighted WF was 2 l H₂O eq/kg CW for sheep. This study also evaluated the sustainability of recent intensification initiatives in Ireland and found that increases in productivity were supported through an increase in green water use and higher grass yields per hectare on both beef and sheep farms.     

Comparison of volumetric and stress-weighted water footprint of grain products in China

The water footprint (WF) concept links physical and virtual forms of water, which can be used for research on the impact on water resources imposed by human consumption or production activities. Debates remain on the calculation methods due to WF being applied for different research purposes, and the large amounts of data required for the calculation being hard to obtain. This paper calculated and compared two WFs called volumetric WF (the volumes of blue and green water are combined with the same weight) and stress-weighted WF (the volumes of blue and green water are combined with different weights) based on water use data to research crop water productivity of grain crops and its impact on water resources in each region of China. Results for volumetric WF and stress-weighted WF of grain products of each region in China differed greatly. In 2010, the average volumetric WF was 1.25 m³/kg with the blue component 0.53 m³/kg, and the average stress-weighted WF was 0.51 m³/kg. In addition, there were significant differences of both kinds of WFs among regions in China. The results showed that volumetric WF could be used as a comprehensive indicator for evaluating crop water productivity, specified in space and time by source (green and blue WFs). Stress-weighted WF could offer a meaningful way of making quantitative comparisons between products, production systems and services in terms of their potential to contribute to water scarcity. The spatial distribution of these two WFs can help decision making to develop water-saving measures, relieve water stress and restore ecosystems for each region in China.     

农产品水足迹研究进展

水是人类生产生活的重要资源,科学合理地评价人类活动对水资源的影响是实现水资源可持续利用的重要保障.水足迹概念的提出创新性地将人类活动消耗的水资源区分为绿水、蓝水和灰水,拓展了水资源可持续利用的评价思路.基于虚拟水(VW)的水足迹理论和基于生命周期(LCA)的水足迹理论将水质与水量的概念相结合,成为了农业水资源管理研究的热点内容.基于VW的水足迹理论主要包括绿水足迹、蓝水足迹和灰水足迹的计算,以及水环境可持续性评价,而基于LCA的水足迹理论体现了水资源的消耗和污染及其对环境造成的综合影响.本文详细介绍了这两种水足迹理论的计算方法与环境可持续评价的研究进展,对比分析两种水足迹理论在描述农产品生产用水及其环境影响方面的差异性,并对其研究前景进行了展望.     

Sustainability of the water footprint of the Spanish pork industry

Around 92% of the humanity's footprint (WF) relates to the agricultural sector, and a considerable proportion of this is associated with animal farming. In Spain, the swine sector accounts for 11% of agricultural output in economic terms and makes substantial demands on freshwater resources. In this study we estimate the WF of the Spanish pig sector at an average 19.5 billion m³/yr (82% green, 8% blue, 10% grey) over the period 2001–08. During this period the WF increased by 23%, due to growing exports. About half the water needed to produce concentrate feed comes from Spain, with the remaining 50% embodied in imported feedstock products. When comparing the blue and grey WFs of feed production in the source regions with indicators of water scarcity and water pollution, we find that most of the feed produced in Spain, unlike that imported, comes from watersheds where freshwater resources are overexploited. The evaluation of the WF of four different pig production systems shows that pigs raised in extensive systems have the largest WF per tonne of live animal. However, water pollution is a particular problem in industrial systems given the high geographical concentration of animals. The swine sector is one of the largest consumers of natural resources in Spain and should, therefore, be an important focal point in agricultural, environmental and water policies.     

Assessing the Environmental Impact of Water Consumption by Energy Crops Grown in Spain

The environmental impact of the water consumption of four typical crop rotations grown in Spain, including energy crops, was analyzed and compared against Spanish agricultural and natural reference situations. The life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology was used for the assessment of the potential environmental impact of blue water (withdrawal from water bodies) and green water (uptake of soil moisture) consumption. The latter has so far been disregarded in LCA. To account for green water, two approaches have been applied: the first accounts for the difference in green water demand of the crops and a reference situation. The second is a green water scarcity index, which measures the fraction of the soil‐water plant consumption to the available green water. Our results show that, if the aim is to minimize the environmental impacts of water consumption, the energy crop rotations assessed in this study were most suitable in basins in the northeast of Spain. In contrast, the energy crops grown in basins in the southeast of Spain were associated with the greatest environmental impacts. Further research into the integration of quantitative green water assessment in LCA is crucial in studies of systems with a high dependence on green water resources.     

Assessing environmental impacts associated with freshwater consumption along the life cycle of animal products: the case of Dutch milk production in Noord-Brabant

Purpose

The assessment of water footprints of a wide range of products has increased awareness on preserving freshwater as a resource. The water footprint of a product was originally defined by Hoekstra and Hung (2002) as the sum of the volumetric water use in terms of green, blue and grey water along the entire life cycle of a product and, as such, does not determine the environmental impact associated with freshwater use. Recently, several papers were published that describe building blocks that enable assessment of the site-specific environmental impact associated with freshwater use along the life cycle of a global food chain, such as the impact on human health (HH), ecosystem quality (EQ) or resource depletion (RD). We integrated this knowledge to enable an assessment of the environmental impact associated with freshwater use along the life cycle of milk production, as a case for a global food chain.

Material and methods

Our approach innovatively combined knowledge about the main impact pathways of freshwater use in life cycle assessment (LCA), knowledge about site-specific freshwater impacts and knowledge about modelling of irrigation requirements of global feed crops to assess freshwater impacts along the life cycle of milk production. We evaluated a Dutch model farm situated on loamy sand in the province of Noord-Brabant, where grass and maize land is commonly irrigated.

Results and discussion

Production of 1 kg of fat-and-protein corrected milk (FPCM) on the model farm in Noord-Brabant required 66 L of consumptive water. About 76 % of this water was used for irrigation during roughage cultivation, 15 % for production of concentrates and 8 % for drinking and cleaning services. Consumptive water use related to production of purchased diesel, gas, electricity and fertiliser was negligible (i.e. total 1 %). Production of 1 kg of FPCM resulted in an impact on HH of 0.8?×?10^?9 disability adjusted life years, on EQ of 12.9?×?10^?3 m²?×?year and on RD of 6.7 kJ. The impact of producing this kilogram of FPCM on RD, for example, was caused mainly by cultivation of concentrate ingredients, and appeared lower than the average impact on RD of production of 1 kg of broccoli in Spain.

Conclusions

Integration of existing knowledge from diverse science fields enabled an assessment of freshwater impacts along the life cycle of a global food chain, such as Dutch milk production, and appeared useful to determine its environmental hotspots. Results from this case study support earlier findings that LCA needs to go beyond simple water volume accounting when the focus is on freshwater scarcity. The approach used, however, required high-resolution inventory global data (i.e. especially regarding crop yield, soil type and root depth), and demonstrated a trade-off between scientific quality of results and applicability of the assessment method.     

Understanding the LCA and ISO water footprint: A response to Hoekstra (2016) “A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA”

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

Water footprint benchmarks for crop production: A first global assessment

In the coming few decades, global freshwater demand will increase to meet the growing demand for food, fibre and biofuel crops. Raising water productivity in agriculture, that is reducing the water footprint (WF) per unit of production, will contribute to reducing the pressure on the limited global freshwater resources. This study establishes a set of global WF benchmark values for a large number of crops grown in the world. The study distinguishes between benchmarks for the green–blue WF (the sum of rain- and irrigation water consumption) and the grey WF (volume of polluted water). The reference period is 1996–2005. We analysed the spatial distribution of the green–blue and grey WFs of different crops as calculated at a spatial resolution of 5 by 5′ with a dynamic water balance and crop yield model. Per crop, we ranked the WF values for all relevant grid cells from smallest to largest and plotted these values against the cumulative percentage of the corresponding production. The study shows that if we would reduce the green–blue WF of crop production everywhere in the world to the level of the best 25th percentile of current global production, global water saving in crop production would be 39% compared to the reference water consumption. With a reduction to the WF levels of the best 10th percentile of current global production, the water saving would be 52%. In the case that nitrogen-related grey WFs in crop production are reduced, worldwide, to the level of the best 25th percentile of current global production, water pollution is reduced by 54%. If grey WFs per ton of crop are further reduced to the level of the best 10th percentile of current production, water pollution is reduced by 79%. The benchmark values provide valuable information for formulating WF reduction targets in crop production. Further studies will be required to test the sensitivity of the benchmark values to the underlying model assumptions, to see whether regionalization of benchmarks is necessary and how certain WF benchmark levels relate to specific technology and agricultural practices.     

Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA: Part I—inventory modelling and characterisation factors for the main impact pathways

Background, aim and scope

Freshwater is a basic resource for humans; however, its link to human health is seldom related to lack of physical access to sufficient freshwater, but rather to poor distribution and access to safe water supplies. On the other hand, freshwater availability for aquatic ecosystems is often reduced due to competition with human uses, potentially leading to impacts on ecosystem quality. This paper summarises how this specific resource use can be dealt with in life cycle analysis (LCA).

Main features

The main quantifiable impact pathways linking freshwater use to the available supply are identified, leading to definition of the flows requiring quantification in the life cycle inventory (LCI).

Results

The LCI needs to distinguish between and quantify evaporative and non-evaporative uses of ‘blue’ and ‘green’ water, along with land use changes leading to changes in the availability of freshwater. Suitable indicators are suggested for the two main impact pathways [namely freshwater ecosystem impact (FEI) and freshwater depletion (FD)], and operational characterisation factors are provided for a range of countries and situations. For FEI, indicators relating current freshwater use to the available freshwater resources (with and without specific consideration of water ecosystem requirements) are suggested. For FD, the parameters required for evaluation of the commonly used abiotic depletion potentials are explored.

Discussion

An important value judgement when dealing with water use impacts is the omission or consideration of non-evaporative uses of water as impacting ecosystems. We suggest considering only evaporative uses as a default procedure, although more precautionary approaches (e.g. an ‘Egalitarian’ approach) may also include non-evaporative uses. Variation in seasonal river flows is not captured in the approach suggested for FEI, even though abstractions during droughts may have dramatic consequences for ecosystems; this has been considered beyond the scope of LCA.

Conclusions

The approach suggested here improves the representation of impacts associated with freshwater use in LCA. The information required by the approach is generally available to LCA practitioners

Recommendations and perspectives

The widespread use of the approach suggested here will require some development (and consensus) by LCI database developers. Linking the suggested midpoint indicators for FEI to a damage approach will require further analysis of the relationship between FEI indicators and ecosystem health.     

Water footprint assessment of sheep farming systems based on farm survey data

Water scarcity is among the main challenges making vulnerable the livestock farming systems in drylands. The water footprint (WF) indicator was proposed as a metric to measure the impacts of livestock production on freshwater resources. Therefore, this study aimed to assess water use in five different Tunisian sheep production systems using the Water Footprint Network methodology. The primary data were obtained from 1050 sheep farms located in 13 Tunisian provinces. A multivariate analysis was performed to characterize the different farming systems. A validation step of the WF modeled values of sheep meat was conducted in 12 sheep farms belonging to two different farming systems. This was done through year-round monitoring of on-farm practices using water metres and recording equipment’s taking into account the direct and indirect water use. The typology analysis came up with five sheep farming systems that are the mixed sheep-cereal (MSC), the agro-sylvo-pastoral (ASP), the agro-pastoral (AP), the extensive agro-pastoral (EAP) and the mixed sheep-olive tree farming systems. The WF of sheep meat produced under the target farming systems ranged from 8654 to 13 056 l/kg live weight. The evaluation of WF of five different sheep production systems figured out that sheep raised under the EAP farming system had the greatest WF per ton of live animal. However, the ASP farming system exhibited the lowest WF. Water used to grow feedstuffs for sheep production accounts for 98% of the total WF of sheep. The green WF accounts for more than 92% of the total WF in all farming systems. Results of monitoring water use at farm scale show that the modeled values of WF are overestimated by an average of 23.3% and 24.1% for the selected farms assigned to the MSC and AP farming systems, respectively. Water use for sheep production is high in most of the Tunisian farms. Therefore, the general assumption that ‘meat production is a driver of water scarcity’ is supported and should be considered as an important focal point in agricultural and water policies. Particular attention should be given to forage crops with low WFs and high contribution to dry matter to provide ration with low WF. The efficient use of green water along the meat value chain is essential to minimize the depletion of blue water resources and to reduce the economic dependency on virtual water through the import of feedstuffs.     

Alternatives for Reducing the Environmental Impact of the Main Residue From a Desalination Plant

One of the most important problems today is the scarcity of fresh water safe enough for human, industrial, and agricultural use. Desalination is an alternative source of fresh water supply in areas with severe problems of water availability. Desalination plants generate a huge amount of brine as the main residual from the plant (about 55% of collected seawater). Because of that, it is important to determine the best environmental option for the brine disposal. This article makes a global environmental analysis, under Spanish conditions, of a desalination plant and an environmental assessment of different final brine disposals, representing a range of the most common alternatives: direct disposal, wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) outflow dilution, and dilution with seawater. The environmental profile of the plant operation and a comparison of the brine final disposal alternatives were established by means of the life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. From an analysis of the whole plant we observed that the highest environmental impact was caused by energy consumption, especially at the reverse osmosis stage, while the most relevant waste was brine. From an analysis of brine final disposal we have elaborated a comparison of the advantages and detriments of the three alternatives. As all of them might be suitable in different specific situations, the results might be useful in decisions about final brine disposal.     

Freshwater use analysis of cassava for food feed fuel in the Mun River basin,Thailand

Purpose

This research aims to assess the current freshwater use in the cassava supply chain for food, feed fuel in the Mun basin, and the water scarcity impact and possible options to increase cassava production to meet the future demand following the Renewable and Alternative Energy Development Plan (AEDP) target.

Methods

This research analyzes freshwater use based on ISO 14046 water footprint assessment. The analysis was implemented based on a life cycle perspective that determines the impact on freshwater use from cassava products along their supply chain. Both direct water use and indirect water use that associated are analyzed. Midpoint impact of water use was assessed using water stress index (WSI) to calculate water scarcity footprint.

Results and discussion

The results show that in the current situation, total freshwater use of all cassava-related product in Mun basin in the base case is 1140 million m³/year. When WSI was applied, water scarcity footprint of all cassava-related products in the Mun basin in the base case was only 147 million m³/year. In the scenario 1, increasing irrigation to increase yield in the existing cassava cultivation area in the Mun basin has the largest water use compare to other scenarios. Scenarios 2 and 3, expanding cassava cultivation area in Mun basin and in other regions, have lower water and water scarcity impact than scenario 1. The benefit from transforming paddy rice (in unsuitable areas) to cassava cultivation was also good. However, more resources are required including land, energy, or fertilizer, and other environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emission or eutrophication could be increased from the increasing resource use. Therefore, the decision-making process needs to consider the trade-off between those factors, and a more complete life cycle assessment (LCA) on the envisioned alternatives should be applied for further analysis.

Conclusions

The increasing demand of biofuels derived from cassava can increase stress on water in the Mun River basin. Increasing irrigation water use in the area as per requirement could possibly increase yield to meet the future feedstock demand but has large water scarcity impact. However, this could be alleviated by using groundwater from additional wells in the farm. Expanding cassava cultivation area could be another option having low water scarcity impact, but it requires more resources and could increase other environmental impacts that need to be further analyzed by a complete LCA.

     

Insights on the Use of Hybrid Life Cycle Assessment for Environmental Footprinting

Establishing a comprehensive environmental footprint that indicates resource use and environmental release hotspots in both direct and indirect operations can help companies formulate impact reduction strategies as part of overall sustainability efforts. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is a useful approach for achieving these objectives. For most companies, financial data are more readily available than material and energy quantities, which suggests a hybrid LCA approach that emphasizes use of economic input‐output (EIO) LCA and process‐based energy and material flow models to frame and develop life cycle emission inventories resulting from company activities. We apply a hybrid LCA framework to an inland marine transportation company that transports bulk commodities within the United States. The analysis focuses on global warming potential, acidification, particulate matter emissions, eutrophication, ozone depletion, and water use. The results show that emissions of greenhouse gases, sulfur, and particulate matter are mainly from direct activities but that supply chain impacts are also significant, particularly in terms of water use. Hotspots were identified in the production, distribution, and use of fuel; the manufacturing, maintenance, and repair of boats and barges; food production; personnel air transport; and solid waste disposal. Results from the case study demonstrate that the aforementioned footprinting framework can provide a sufficiently reliable and comprehensive baseline for a company to formulate, measure, and monitor its efforts to reduce environmental impacts from internal and supply chain operations.     

Integrating ecological and water footprint accounting in a multi-regional input–output framework

Carbon, ecological, and water footprints (CF, EF, and WF) are accounting tools that can be used to understand the connection between consumption activities and environmental pressures on the Earth's atmosphere, bioproductive areas, and freshwater resources. These indicators have been gaining acceptance from researchers and policymakers but are not harmonized with one another, and ecological and water footprints are lacking in their representation of product supply chains. In this paper we integrate existing methods for calculating EF and WF within a multi-regional input–output (MRIO) modelling framework that has already been successfully applied for CF estimation. We introduce a new MRIO method for conserving the high degree of product detail found in existing physical EF and WF accounts. Calculating EF and WF in this way is consistent with the current best practice for CF accounting, making results more reliable and easier to compare across the three indicators. We discuss alternatives for linking the MRIO model and the footprint datasets and the implications for results. The model presented here is novel and offers significant improvements in EF and WF accounting through harmonization of methods with CF accounting, preservation of product-level detail, comprehensive inclusion of sectors of the global economy, and clear representation of flows along supply chains and international trade linkages. The matrix organization of the model improves transparency and provides a structure upon which further improvements in footprint calculation can be built. The model described here is the first environmentally extended MRIO model that harmonizes EF and WF accounts and aligns physical unit data of product use with standard economic and environmental accounting.     

Assessing freshwater use impacts in LCA,part 2: case study of broccoli production in the UK and Spain

Background, aim and scope  

Milà i Canals et al. (Int J Life Cycle Ass 14(1):28-42, 2009) referred to as ‘Part 1’ in this paper) showed that impacts associated with use of freshwater must be treated more rigorously than is usual in life cycle assessment (LCA), going beyond the conventional consideration only of ‘blue’ water (i.e. irrigation and other abstractions), and suggested an operational method to include the impacts on freshwater ecosystems (freshwater ecosystem impact) and abiotic resource depletion (freshwater depletion). The inclusion of water-related impacts in LCA is of paramount importance, particularly for agricultural systems due to their large water consumption worldwide. A case study of UK consumption of broccoli grown in the UK and Spain is presented here to illustrate the method suggested in Part 1.     

Methodological Challenges in Volumetric and Impact‐Oriented Water Footprints

This work identifies shortcomings in water footprinting and discusses whether the water footprint should be a volumetric or impact‐oriented index. A key challenge is the current definition of water consumption according to which evaporated water is regarded as lost for the originating watershed per se. Continental evaporation recycling rates of up to 100% within short time and length scales show that this definition is not generally valid. Also, the inclusion of land use effects on the hydrological balance is questionable, as land transformation often leads to higher water availability due to locally increased runoff. Unless potentially negative consequences, such as flooding or waterlogging, and adverse effects on the global water cycle are considered, water credits from land transformation seem unjustified. Most impact assessment methods use ratios of annual withdrawal or consumption to renewability rates to denote local water scarcity. As these ratios are influenced by two metrics—withdrawal and availability—arid regions can be regarded as uncritical if only small fractions of the limited renewable supplies are used. Besides neglecting sensitivities to additional water uses, such indicators consider neither ground nor surface water stocks, which can buffer water shortages temporally. Authors favoring volumetric indicators claim that global freshwater appropriation is more important than local impacts, easier to determine, and less error prone than putting complex ecological interaction into mathematical models. As shown in an example, volumetric water footprints can be misleading without additional interpretation because numerically smaller footprints can cause higher impacts.     

Developing a regional diatom index for assessment and monitoring of freshwater streams in sub-tropical Australia

The use of borrowed indices to assess stream health has limitations and research suggests a need to develop more reliable regionally based indices that are sensitive to the relationship between taxa and environmental conditions. Implementing this is challenging in the Southern Hemisphere given the scarcity of diatom indices, specifically in sub-tropical areas. The purpose of this study was to develop a regionally based diatom index to assess freshwater lotic systems in sub-tropical eastern Australia and compare the results with borrowed indices to derive meaningful inferences on river health. A total of 119 epilithic diatom and water samples were collected during 2014–2015 from the Richmond River Catchment in Northern NSW Australia. Statistical analysis indicated that total phosphorus (TP) and total nitrogen (TN) were strong variables influencing the data set and subsequently TP was chosen as a nutrient proxy for the index. Analysis of diatoms resulted in TP sensitivity values (1–5) being assigned to 105 species with relative abundance of >1% in the data set. These species were used to calculate the Richmond River Diatom Index (RRDI) for 45 sites within the Catchment. The index effectively scored sites along the environmental gradient with sites in the upper catchment generally scoring lower (healthier) than the mid and lower catchment sites. The index compared positively with both the Diatom Species Index for Australian Rivers (DSIAR) (r = 0.76) and the Trophic Diatom Index (TDI) (r = 0.65). Further research is suggested to test the RRDI on independent sites in neighbouring catchments and develop class boundaries from the RRDI so that the index can be readily used by water managers to assess and monitor freshwater systems in sub-tropical Australia.     

Identification of methodological challenges remaining in the assessment of a water scarcity footprint: a review

Purpose

This work presents a systematic review, updating the information on the currently available methods to calculate the water footprint (WF), and addressing the following methodological challenges, as they have not been deeply studied to date: (1) accounting and assessing the environmental impacts related to changes in evapotranspiration (ET); (2) inventory of actual blue freshwater consumption in agriculture; (3) temporal and spatial variation to establish explicit characterisation factors (CFs) and (4) adequate connection between inventory flows and spatio-temporal explicit CFs.

Methods

A systematic review relying on the guidelines of Pullin and Stewart (Conserv Biol 20(6):1647–1656, 2006) was conducted. Taking into account five specific formulated research questions in the WF field, WF studies were selected based on two ‘types’ of screening criteria: keyword searches and the WF study filter.

Results and discussion

From the 128 papers in peer-reviewed journals on product WF from a life cycle perspective, this literature review shows that major methodological challenges remain partially unsolved, which could degrade the accuracy of product WF assessments. To understand how land use affects ET, and depending on the land cover and size of the land use production system, actual ET can be estimated based on meteorological data on water balance equations embedded in crop and forest growth models, from field measurements at meteorological stations and more recently from remote sensing. For accounting for blue water consumption in agriculture, there are two types of approaches that lead to quite different results: inventory from actual farming records of applied irrigation and inventory from modelled ET associated with irrigation. Depending on the question being addressed, the practitioner can apply either approach. Furthermore, when a single freshwater scarcity CF is determined for large sub-watersheds, especially when the sub-watersheds have non-uniform freshwater availability and demand, uncertainty in the freshwater use-related impacts is introduced. Regarding the connection between inventory flows and spatio-temporal explicit CFs, the difficulty in identifying the exact location of background processes and characterising the local environmental characteristics (e.g. edaphoclimatic conditions, land cover) can hinder the elaboration of an accurate spatially differentiated impact assessment, as more generic CFs can be applied.

Conclusions

This systematic review shows that there are clearly future research needs with respect to the interrelations between freshwater use and potential damages in the areas of protection of resources, human health and ecosystem quality. It is also of paramount importance to understand the effects of land use and land cover change and water irrigation on WF damage.