Water footprint of livestock products and production systems: a review
R. Ibidhi
A and H. Ben Salem A B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Laboratoire des Productions Animales et Fourragères, Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique de Tunisie (INRAT), Université de Carthage, 2049 Ariana, Tunisia.
B Corresponding author. Email: bensalem.hichem@yahoo.com
Animal Production Science 60(11) 1369-1380 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN17705
Submitted: 14 October 2017 Accepted: 4 March 2020 Published: 19 May 2020
Abstract
This paper reviews the small but growing literature on the water footprint (WF) of livestock production and provides an analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of this indicator. We identified 42 papers published in peer-reviewed international journals between 2000 and 2017, which covered the WF of dairy, meat and egg production using life-cycle assessment and WF network methodologies. The WF of livestock products decreases with the level of intensification of the farming system. In addition, the WF of meat is higher than that of either milk or eggs. The WF of beef is much larger than the WFs from sheep, goat, pork and chicken. The WF variation among different animal products is explained by the difference of the feed conversion ratio. Ruminants (cattle, sheep and goat) have a poor feed conversion ratio compared with monogastric animals (poultry and swine). Estimating the WF of livestock production and economic analysis of water use at different stages of production will help farmers and other stakeholders to identify the most demanding activities in term of water use, and implement strategies to improve water-use efficiency. Thus, feed production was identified as the largest contributor of the WF of livestock production. Options to reduce the WF of livestock production include the use of low-WF feeds, more efficient irrigation of crops used for livestock feed, and reduced consumption of animal-sourced protein in human diets through substitution with plant proteins. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis highlighted the importance of combining WF with other environmental-footprint and sustainability indicators to provide more reliable information for decision makers.
Additional keywords: animal products, feed production, production systems, water consumption, water scarcity.
References
Bosire CK, Ogutu JO, Said MY, Krol MS, Leeuw JD, Hoekstra AY (2015) Trends and spatial variation in water and land footprints of meat and milk production systems in Kenya. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 205, 36–47.| Trends and spatial variation in water and land footprints of meat and milk production systems in Kenya.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Boulay A-M, Motoshita M, Pfister S, Bulle C, Muñoz I, Franceschini H, Margni M (2015) Analysis of water use impact assessment methods (part A): evaluation of modeling choices based on a quantitative comparison of scarcity and human health indicators. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 20, 139–160.
| Analysis of water use impact assessment methods (part A): evaluation of modeling choices based on a quantitative comparison of scarcity and human health indicators.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chapagain AK, Hoekstra AY (2003) ‘Virtual water flows between nations in relation to trade in livestock and livestock products.’ (UNESCO-IHE: Delft, Netherlands)
Chapagain AK, Hoekstra AY (2011) The blue, green and grey water footprint of rice from production and consumption perspectives. Ecological Economics 70, 749–758.
| The blue, green and grey water footprint of rice from production and consumption perspectives.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Chenoweth J, Hadjikakou M, Zoumides C (2014) Quantifying the human impact on water resources: a critical review of the water footprint concept. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 18, 2325–2342.
| Quantifying the human impact on water resources: a critical review of the water footprint concept.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Damerau K, Waha K, Herrero M (2019) The impact of nutrient-rich food choices on agricultural water-use efficiency. Nature Sustainability 2, 233–241.
| The impact of nutrient-rich food choices on agricultural water-use efficiency.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
De Boer IJM, Hoving IE, Vellinga TV, Van de Ven GWJ, Leffelaar PA, Gerber PJ (2013) Assessing environmental impacts associated with freshwater consumption along the life cycle of animal products: the case of Dutch milk production in Noord-Brabant. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18, 193–203.
| Assessing environmental impacts associated with freshwater consumption along the life cycle of animal products: the case of Dutch milk production in Noord-Brabant.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
de Miguel Á, Hoekstra AY, García-Calvo E (2015) Sustainability of the water footprint of the Spanish pork industry. Ecological Indicators 57, 465–474.
| Sustainability of the water footprint of the Spanish pork industry.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Doreau M, Corson MS, Wiedemann SG (2012) Water use by livestock: a global perspective for a regional issue? Animal Frontiers 2, 9–16.
| Water use by livestock: a global perspective for a regional issue?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Drastig K, Prochnow A, Kraatz S, Klauss H, Plöchl M (2010) Water footprint analysis for the assessment of milk production in Brandenburg (Germany). Advances in Geosciences 27, 65–70.
| Water footprint analysis for the assessment of milk production in Brandenburg (Germany).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ercin AE, Aldaya MM, Hoekstra AY (2012) The water footprint of soy milk and soy burger and equivalent animal products. Ecological Indicators 18, 392–402.
| The water footprint of soy milk and soy burger and equivalent animal products.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
FAO (2011) ‘Guidelines for the preparation of livestock sector reviews.’ (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome)
Galli A, Wiedmann T, Ercin E, Knoblauch D, Ewing B, Giljum S (2012) Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a ‘footprint family’ of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet. Ecological Indicators 16, 100–112.
| Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a ‘footprint family’ of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gerbens-Leenes PW, Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2013) The water footprint of poultry, pork and beef: a comparative study in different countries and production systems. Water Resources and Industry 1–2, 25–36.
| The water footprint of poultry, pork and beef: a comparative study in different countries and production systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Greenwood DJ, Zhang K, Hilton HW, Thompson AJ (2010) Opportunities for improving irrigation efficiency with quantitative models, soil water sensors and wireless technology. The Journal of Agricultural Science 148, 1–16.
| Opportunities for improving irrigation efficiency with quantitative models, soil water sensors and wireless technology.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fereres E, Villalobos FJ, Orgaz F, Minguez MI, Van Halsema G, Perry CJ (2017) Commentary: on the water footprint as an indicator of water use in food production. Irrigation Science 35, 83–85.
| Commentary: on the water footprint as an indicator of water use in food production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Harika R, Pandey D, Sharma A, Sirohi S (2015) Water footprint of milk production in Andhra Pradesh. Indian Journal of Dairy Science 68, 384–389.
Hoekstra AY (2012) The hidden water resource use behind meat and dairy. Animal Frontiers 2, 3–8.
| The hidden water resource use behind meat and dairy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hoekstra AY (2016) A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA. Ecological Indicators 66, 564–573.
| A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hoekstra AY, Hung PQ (2002) Virtual water trade. A quantification of virtual water flows between nations in relation to international crop trade. Value of Water Research Report Series 11, 166.
Hoekstra AY, Chapagain AK, Aldaya MM, Mekonnen MM (2009) ‘Water footprint manual: state of the art 2009.’ (Water Footprint Network: Enschede, Netherlands)
Hoekstra AY, Chapagain AK, Aldaya MM, Mekonnen MM (2011) ‘The water footprint assessment manual: setting the global standard.’ (Earthscan: London)
Huang J, Xu C-C, Ridoutt BG, Liu J-J, Zhang H-L, Chen F, Li Y (2014) Water availability footprint of milk and milk products from large-scale dairy production systems in northeast China. Journal of Cleaner Production 79, 91–97.
| Water availability footprint of milk and milk products from large-scale dairy production systems in northeast China.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ibidhi R, Hoekstra AY, Gerbens-Leenes PW, Chouchane H (2017) Water, land and carbon footprints of sheep and chicken meat produced in Tunisia under different farming systems. Ecological Indicators 77, 304–313.
| Water, land and carbon footprints of sheep and chicken meat produced in Tunisia under different farming systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
ISO (2014) ‘14046: environmental management–water footprint–principles, requirements and guidelines.’ (International Organization for Standardization: Geneva)
Kannan N, Osei E, Gallego O, Saleh A (2017) Estimation of green water footprint of animal feed for beef cattle production in southern Great Plains. Water Resources and Industry 17, 11–18.
| Estimation of green water footprint of animal feed for beef cattle production in southern Great Plains.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kearney J (2010) Food consumption trends and drivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 365, 2793–2807.
| Food consumption trends and drivers.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20713385PubMed |
Keesstra SD, Bouma J, Wallinga J, Tittonell P, Smith P, Cerdà A, Montanarella L, Quinton JN, Pachepsky Y, Van Der Putten WH, Bardgett RD (2016) The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the United Nations sustainable development goals. Soil 2, 111–128.
| The significance of soils and soil science towards realization of the United Nations sustainable development goals.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Legesse G, Ominski KH, Beauchemin KA, Pfister S, Martel M, McGeough EJ, Hoekstra AY, Kroebel R, Cordeiro MRC, McAllister TA (2017) Board-invited review: quantifying water use in ruminant production. Journal of Animal Science 95, 2001–2018.
| Board-invited review: quantifying water use in ruminant production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28726986PubMed |
Lovarelli D, Bacenetti J, Fiala M (2016) Water footprint of crop productions: a review. The Science of the Total Environment 548–549, 236–251.
| Water footprint of crop productions: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26802352PubMed |
Manazza J, Iglesias D (2012) Water footprint in milk agrifood chain in the sub-humid and semi-arid central region of Argentina. In ‘Proceedings of the International Association of Agricultural Economists (IAAE) triennial conference’, pp. 1–23, Foz do Iguaçu, Brazil, 18–24 August 2012.
Mekonnen M, Hoekstra A (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, Netherlands.
Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2012) A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products. Ecosystems 15, 401–415.
| A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Murphy E, de Boer IJM, van Middelaar CE, Holden NM, Shalloo L, Curran TP, Upton J (2017) Water footprinting of dairy farming in Ireland. Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 547–555.
| Water footprinting of dairy farming in Ireland.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Noya I, Aldea X, Gasol CM, González-García S, Amores MJ, Colón J, Ponsá S, Roman I, Rubio MA, Casas E, Moreira MT, Boschmonart-Rives J (2016) Carbon and water footprint of pork supply chain in Catalonia: From feed to final products. Journal of Environmental Management 171, 133–143.
| Carbon and water footprint of pork supply chain in Catalonia: From feed to final products.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26861226PubMed |
Owusu-Sekyere E, Scheepers M, Jordaan H (2016) Water footprint of milk produced and processed in South Africa: implications for policy-makers and stakeholders along the dairy value chain. Water 8, 322
| Water footprint of milk produced and processed in South Africa: implications for policy-makers and stakeholders along the dairy value chain.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Owusu-Sekyere E, Jordaan H, Chouchane H (2017a) Evaluation of water footprint and economic water productivities of dairy products of South Africa. Ecological Indicators 83, 32–40.
| Evaluation of water footprint and economic water productivities of dairy products of South Africa.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Owusu-Sekyere E, Scheepers ME, Jordaan H (2017b) Economic water productivities along the dairy value chain in South Africa: implications for sustainable and economically efficient water-use policies in the dairy industry. Ecological Economics 134, 22–28.
| Economic water productivities along the dairy value chain in South Africa: implications for sustainable and economically efficient water-use policies in the dairy industry.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palhares JCP, Pezzopane JRM (2015) Water footprint accounting and scarcity indicators of conventional and organic dairy production systems. Journal of Cleaner Production 93, 299–307.
| Water footprint accounting and scarcity indicators of conventional and organic dairy production systems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palhares JCP, Morelli M, Junior CC (2017) Impact of roughage-concentrate ratio on the water footprints of beef feedlots. Agricultural Systems 155, 126–135.
| Impact of roughage-concentrate ratio on the water footprints of beef feedlots.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Perry C (2014) Water footprints: path to enlightenment, or false trail? Agricultural Water Management 134, 119–125.
| Water footprints: path to enlightenment, or false trail?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ran Y, Lannerstad M, Herrero M, Van Middelaar CE, De Boer IJM (2016) Assessing water resource use in livestock production: a review of methods. Livestock Science 187, 68–79.
| Assessing water resource use in livestock production: a review of methods.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridoutt B, Hodges D (2017) From ISO14046 to water footprint labeling: a case study of indicators applied to milk production in south-eastern Australia. The Science of the Total Environment 599–600, 14–19.
| From ISO14046 to water footprint labeling: a case study of indicators applied to milk production in south-eastern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 28463697PubMed |
Ridoutt BG, Pfister S (2010) A revised approach to water footprinting to make transparent the impacts of consumption and production on global freshwater scarcity. Global Environmental Change 20, 113–120.
| A revised approach to water footprinting to make transparent the impacts of consumption and production on global freshwater scarcity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridoutt BG, Williams SRO, Baud S, Fraval S, Marks N (2010) Short communication: the water footprint of dairy products: case study involving skim milk powder. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 5114–5117.
| Short communication: the water footprint of dairy products: case study involving skim milk powder.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20965326PubMed |
Ridoutt BG, Sanguansri P, Harper GS (2011) Comparing carbon and water footprints for beef cattle production in southern Australia. Sustainability 3, 2443–2445.
| Comparing carbon and water footprints for beef cattle production in southern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridoutt BG, Sanguansri P, Nolan M, Marks N (2012) Meat consumption and water scarcity: beware of generalizations. Journal of Cleaner Production 28, 127–133.
| Meat consumption and water scarcity: beware of generalizations.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ridoutt BG, Page G, Opie K, Huang J, Bellotti W (2014) Carbon, water and land use footprints of beef cattle production systems in southern Australia. Journal of Cleaner Production 73, 24–30.
| Carbon, water and land use footprints of beef cattle production systems in southern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Rijsberman FR (2006) Water scarcity: fact or fiction? Agricultural Water Management 80, 5–22.
| Water scarcity: fact or fiction?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Schyns JF, Hoekstra AY (2014) The added value of water footprint assessment for national water policy: a case study for Morocco. PLoS One 9, e99705
| The added value of water footprint assessment for national water policy: a case study for Morocco.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 24919194PubMed |
Sraïri MT, Rjafallah M, Kuper M, Le Gal P-Y (2009) Water productivity through dual purpose (milk and meat) herds in the Tadla irrigation scheme, Morocco. Irrigation and Drainage 58, S334–S345.
| Water productivity through dual purpose (milk and meat) herds in the Tadla irrigation scheme, Morocco.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sraïri MT, Benjelloun R, Karrou M, Ates S, Kuper M (2016) Biophysical and economic water productivity of dual-purpose cattle farming. Animal 10, 283–291.
| Biophysical and economic water productivity of dual-purpose cattle farming.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26536978PubMed |
Sultana MN, Uddin MM, Ridoutt BG, Peters KJ (2014) Comparison of water use in global milk production for different typical farms. Agricultural Systems 129, 9–21.
| Comparison of water use in global milk production for different typical farms.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sultana MN, Uddin MM, Ridoutt B, Hemme T, Peters K (2015) Benchmarking consumptive water use of bovine milk production systems for 60 geographical regions: an implication for global food security. Global Food Security 4, 56–68.
| Benchmarking consumptive water use of bovine milk production systems for 60 geographical regions: an implication for global food security.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Toro-Mujica P, Aguilar C, Vera R, Cornejo K (2016) A simulation-based approach for evaluating the effects of farm type, management, and rainfall on the water footprint of sheep grazing systems in a semi-arid environment. Agricultural Systems 148, 75–85.
| A simulation-based approach for evaluating the effects of farm type, management, and rainfall on the water footprint of sheep grazing systems in a semi-arid environment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Vanham D, Bidoglio G (2013) A review on the indicator water footprint for the EU28. Ecological Indicators 26, 61–75.
| A review on the indicator water footprint for the EU28.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wichelns D (2015) Virtual water and water footprints do not provide helpful insight regarding international trade or water scarcity. Ecological Indicators 52, 277–283.
| Virtual water and water footprints do not provide helpful insight regarding international trade or water scarcity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wiedemann S, McGahan E (2011) ‘Environmental assessment of an egg production supply chain using life cycle assessment.’ (Australian Egg Corporation: Sydney)
Wiedemann S, McGahan E, Murphy C, Yan MJ, Henry B, Thoma G, Ledgard S (2015) Environmental impacts and resource use of Australian beef and lamb exported to the USA determined using life cycle assessment. Journal of Cleaner Production 94, 67–75.
| Environmental impacts and resource use of Australian beef and lamb exported to the USA determined using life cycle assessment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wiedemann SG, McGahan EJ, Murphy CM (2017) Resource use and environmental impacts from Australian chicken meat production. Journal of Cleaner Production 140, 675–684.
| Resource use and environmental impacts from Australian chicken meat production.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zhang GP, Hoekstra AY, Mathews RE (2013) Water footprint assessment (WFA) for better water governance and sustainable development. Water Resources and Industry 1–2, 1–6.
| Water footprint assessment (WFA) for better water governance and sustainable development.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zonderland-Thomassen MA, Ledgard SF (2012) Water footprinting: a comparison of methods using New Zealand dairy farming as a case study. Agricultural Systems 110, 30–40.
| Water footprinting: a comparison of methods using New Zealand dairy farming as a case study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zonderland-Thomassen MA, Lieffering M, Ledgard SF (2014) Water footprint of beef cattle and sheep produced in New Zealand: water scarcity and eutrophication impacts. Journal of Cleaner Production 73, 253–262.
| Water footprint of beef cattle and sheep produced in New Zealand: water scarcity and eutrophication impacts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
