Nutritional water productivity and diets

Renault, D.; Wallender, W. W.

doi:10.1016/s0378-3774(99)00107-9

Cited by 196 publications

(139 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The food requirements of diets based on meat from grainfed cattle may require twice the water required to support vegetarian diets. A diet without meat requires an estimated 2000 l per day to produce, while a diet high in grain-fed beef requires 5000 l of water (Renault and Wallender, 2000). Thus, the potential to reduce pressure on water resources by changes in food consumption patterns seems high.…”

Section: Changing Food Demand Patterns and Limiting Post-harvest Lossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management

Laghari

Vanham

Rauch

2012

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

191

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The Indus basin is one of the regions in the world that is faced with major challenges for its water sector, due to population growth, rapid urbanisation and industrialisation, environmental degradation, unregulated utilization of the resources, inefficient water use and poverty, all aggravated by climate change. The Indus Basin is shared by 4 countriesPakistan, India, Afghanistan and China. With a current population of 237 million people which is projected to increase to 319 million in 2025 and 383 million in 2050, already today water resources are abstracted almost entirely (more than 95 % for irrigation). Climate change will result in increased water availability in the short term. However in the long term water availability will decrease. Some current aspects in the basin need to be re-evaluated. During the past decades water abstractions -and especially groundwater extractionshave augmented continuously to support a rice-wheat system where rice is grown during the kharif (wet, summer) season (as well as sugar cane, cotton, maize and other crops) and wheat during the rabi (dry, winter) season. However, the sustainability of this system in its current form is questionable. Additional water for domestic and industrial purposes is required for the future and should be made available by a reduction in irrigation requirements. This paper gives a comprehensive listing and description of available options for current and future sustainable water resources management (WRM) within the basin. Sustainable WRM practices include both water supply management and water demand management options. Water supply management options include: (1) reservoir management as the basin is characterised by a strong seasonal behaviour in water availability (monsoon and meltwater) and water demands; (2) water quality conservation and investment in wastewater infrastructure; (3) the use of alternative water resources like the recycling of wastewater and desalination; (4) land use planning and soil conservation as well as flood management, with a focus on the reduction of erosion and resulting sedimentation as well as the restoration of ecosystem services like wetlands and natural floodplains. Water demand management options include: (1) the management of conjunctive use of surface and groundwater; as well as (2) the rehabilitation and modernization of existing infrastructure. Other demand management options are: (3) the increase of water productivity for agriculture; (4) crop planning and diversification including the critical assessment of agricultural export, especially (basmati) rice; (5) economic instruments and (6) changing food demand patterns and limiting post-harvest losses.

show abstract

Section: Changing Food Demand Patterns and Limiting Post-harvest Lossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management

Laghari

Vanham

Rauch

2012

Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci.

191

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many consumers may decide to reduce their red meat consumption because of the perception of the contribution to methane production by livestock and the low water productivity of animal products per unit of water used (Renault & Wallender, 2000;Wenhold et al, 2007). The popular press is fuelling these sentiments, encouraging consumers to eat less meat.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But in terms of protein produced per unit of water, animal products are far more efficient than fruit crops and several other food crops, such as grains and vegetables (Renault & Wallender, 2000;Wenhold et al, 2007). Furthermore, the importance of animal products in providing bio-available mineral nutrients (Laker, 2005) is overlooked.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A South African perspective on livestock production in relation to greenhouse gases and water usage

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The general perception that livestock is a major contributor to global warming resulted mainly from the FAO publication, Livestock's Long Shadow, in 2006, which indicated that livestock is responsible for 18% of the world's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This figure has since been proved to be an overestimation, since it includes deforestation and other indirect contributions. The most recent figure is in the order of 5% -10%. Although only ruminants can convert the world's high-fibre vegetation into highquality protein sources for human consumption, ruminant production systems are targeted as they are perceived to produce large quantities of GHG. Livestock is also accused of using large quantities of water, an allegation that is based on questionable assumptions and the perception that all sources of food production require a similar and equal quantity and quality of water. In the case of ruminants, extensive systems are usually found to have a lower per-area carbon footprint than grain-fed systems, but a higher footprint if expressed in terms of kg product. Feedlots maximize efficiency of meat production, resulting in a lower carbon footprint, whereas organic production systems consume more energy and have a bigger carbon footprint than conventional production systems. Cows on pastures produce more methane than cows on high concentrate diets. In South Africa, as in most of the countries in the sub-tropics, livestock production is the only option on about 70% of the agricultural land, since the marginal soils and rainfall do not allow for crop production and the utilization of green water. An effective way to reduce the carbon and water footprint of livestock is to decrease livestock numbers and increase production per animal, thereby improving their efficiency.________________________________________________________________________________

show abstract

“…Mekonnen and Hoekstra [5] estimated the global water footprint of animal-based products and concluded that governments promoting a shift away from meat-rich diets will eventually become a component of environmental policies. From the perspective of nutritional water productivity, which describes the mass or energy of food produced per unit volume of water, changes in food habits may be required to provide the additional water needed to feed a larger population [6]. Food security will probably depend on people consuming a higher percentage of plant-based foods that can reduce the water necessary to grow crops [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Water Footprints to Identify Alternatives for Conserving Local Water Resources in California

Marrin¹

2016

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a management tool for addressing water consumption issues, footprints have become increasingly utilized on scales ranging from global to personal. A question posed by this paper is whether water footprint data that are routinely compiled for particular regions may be used to assess the effectiveness of actions taken by local residents to conserve local water resources. The current California drought has affected an agriculturally productive region with large population centers that consume a portion of the locally produced food, and the state's arid climate demands a large volume of blue water as irrigation from its dwindling surface and ground water resources. Although California exports most of its food products, enough is consumed within the state so that residents shifting their food choices and/or habits could save as much or more local blue water as their reduction of household or office water use. One of those shifts is reducing the intake of animal-based products that require the most water of any food group on both a gravimetric and caloric basis. Another shift is reducing food waste, which represents a shared responsibility among consumers and retailers, however, consumer preferences ultimately drive much of this waste.

show abstract

Nutritional water productivity and diets

Cited by 196 publications

References 4 publications

The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management

The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management

A South African perspective on livestock production in relation to greenhouse gases and water usage

Using Water Footprints to Identify Alternatives for Conserving Local Water Resources in California

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About