Cities are hotspots of commodity consumption, with implications for both local and systemic water resources. Water flows "virtually" into and out of cities through the extensive cross-boundary exchange of goods and services. Both virtual and real water flows are affected by water supply investments and urban planning decisions, which influence residential, commercial, and industrial development. This form of water "teleconnection" is being increasingly recognized as an important aspect of water decision-making. The role of trade and virtual water flows as an alternative to expanding a city's "real" water supply is rarely acknowledged, with an emphasis placed instead on monotonic expansion of engineering potable water supplies. We perform a literature review of water footprint studies to evaluate OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2015, 7 8462 the potential and importance of taking virtual flows into account in urban planning and policy. We compare and contrast current methods to assess virtual water flows. We also identify and discuss priorities for future research in urban water footprint analysis.

Conventional indicators of water use for urban areas account primarily for direct water use. In contrast, our objective here is to employ the water footprint (WF) concept and methodology to include the virtual or indirect water use to assess the production‐side and consumption‐side WF of 65 United States (U.S.) cities. The 65 cities include the largest metropolitan areas and some of the major mid‐sized cities in the U.S. We use metropolitan areas to define our city boundaries as this is the native spatial resolution of the main datasets used. To estimate the urban WFs, we integrated large and disparate datasets, including commodity flow (agricultural, livestock, and industrial commodities), water use, and socioeconomic data. By analyzing the estimated WF values, we found indirect water use accounts on average for 66% of the WF of consumption. We found some cities are net virtual water exporters (11 of 65) because they rely heavily on direct water uses or are heavy producers of industrial commodities. Also, WF patterns vary widely across the U.S. but regional patterns seem to emerge. For example, the dense cities of the U.S. northeast megaregion have a significantly low per capita WF relative to the other cities, while cities in the Gulf Coast megaregion have a significantly higher industrial WF of production and consumption. Furthermore, there is inequality in the WF of consumption where a few cities account for a disproportionate share of the total U.S. urban water uses.

No abstract

No abstract