Towards understanding the integrative approach of the water, energy and food nexus

doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.046

Science of The Total Environment

Volume 574, 1 January 2017, Pages 1131-1139

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.046 Get rights and content

Highlights

•
Increasing interlinks, resource crises and management failures as nexus drivers
•
Nexus as the newest integrated management paradigm in environmental sciences
•
Incorporation, cross-linking and assimilation as three understandings of the nexus
•
Nexus is a novel concept with few practical recommendations regarding governance.

Abstract

The water, energy and food nexus (WEF nexus) is currently quite popular in environmental management. The concept found a fertile ground in science and policymaking, but there is no consistent view on the meaning of integration within the nexus. Here, a wealth of publications is reviewed in an endeavour to: (1) reveal the lines of justification for the need of the WEF nexus debate and (2) identify the range of tools for analysing the interdependent resource issues of the nexus using an integrated framework of science and policy. There are three drivers behind the emergence of the nexus thinking. These are a) increasing resource interlinks due to growing scarcities, b) recent resource supply crises, and c) failures of sector-driven management strategies. Evaluation of the WEF nexus integrative debate can be carried out using four key criteria, namely ability to change current policy debates, issue and thinking novelty, practicability and measurability, and clearness and implementation roadmap. It is clear that, although the nexus has been quite successful in changing policy debates, issue prioritization is missing and seems to be left to specific case studies and policymakers' choices. There is a high need for ‘incorporation’ and ‘cross-linking’ of issues between the three resources. In this regard, nexus governance is the missing link in the nexus debate.

Graphical abstract

Introduction

Evident in hundreds of reports and numerous proceedings of global and regional conferences and gatherings (e.g. World Forum gathering in 2011; Bonn WEF Conference in 2011; World Water Forum and the Rio Conference in 2012; the Stockholm Water Week 2014; many science-driven conferences in the same period in Bonn; Chapel Hill, etc.) that the water, energy and food nexus, often called WEF nexus, is currently quite popular in environmental management. Since its promotion, the ‘WEF nexus’ has related to hundreds of scientific publications. We counted more than 300 nexus-specific publications since 2009. It seems that this idea found a fertile ground in policy-making and science. This review paper found that using an integrated perspective on the management of the three resources is a new approach. At the same time, demands for such integration in the water-food, water-energy and food-energy sub-nexuses date back to programmes by the United Nations University (UNU) in the early 1980s, while explicit reference to three-way nexus appeared in the late 2000s (Scott et al., 2015). Yet, there is no consistent view on the meaning of integration within the nexus although this idea lies in the core of all nexus understandings. Further, the paper aims at outlining key understandings of the integrative approach of the WEF nexus using recent literature.

Section snippets

Drivers behind the nexus thinking

Literature on the WEF nexus reveals three lines of justification for the need for the WEF nexus debate: a) increasing resource interlinks due to growing scarcities, b) recent resource supply crises, and c) failures of sector-driven management strategies. These are also the drivers behind the emergence of the nexus thinking. The first justification is the most empirical and analytical one. The argument here is that internal drivers, such as economic and demographic changes, lead to growing

Nexus as an integration paradigm

The WEF nexus is well-received in scientific literature as a “promising approach” (Allan et al., 2015), an “innovation” (Struik et al., 2014) or a “new thinking” (Ringler et al., 2013). The innovative aspect of the nexus is that it shifts attention from the one-sector view to a more balanced view of issues linking the three resources. Yet, one should not expect that sector-specific expertise will be less in demand or a new management field will evolve. In fact, a theory on the grand WEF nexus

Understandings of integration in the nexus paradigm

The idea behind the nexus is to look at the interdependent resource issues of water, energy and food using an integrated framework in scientific analysis and policymaking. Yet, there is no uniform way to do this. Two questions are thus open: First, how should the ‘process of integration’ look like, i.e. which links should be examined and at which stage of the management value chain? and, second, how should the ‘state or view of integration’ look like, i.e. in which institutions and by which

Initial evaluation

An initial evaluation of the WEF nexus integrative debate can be carried out by analysing perceptions in key 34 nexus publications using four key criteria as follows.

Conclusions

The emergence of the nexus thinking is the most recent reminder of the undergoing transition of scientific thought and policies towards integrative thinking to address global change and challenges. In this sense, systems concepts that stress on foresight, adaptability, resilience and human manipulation of planetary processes (anthropocene) contributed to the development of global consensus and developmental goals, such as the SDGs or Green Economy. Ultimately, they also produced popular

Acknowledgements

This study has been supported by the Nexus Research Focus of the TH Köln – University of Applied Sciences – Germany, with support of Minister for Innovation, Science and Research of the State of North Rhine Westphalia, grant number 321-8.03.04.02-2012/07.

References (85)

M. Bazilian et al.
Considering the energy, water and food nexus: towards an integrated modelling approach
Energ Policy
(2011)
E.M. Biggs et al.
Sustainable development and the water–energy–food nexus: a perspective on livelihoods
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2015)
J.J. Bogardi et al.
Water security for a planet under pressure: interconnected challenges of a changing world call for sustainable solutions
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2012)
J.A. Dearing et al.
Safe and just operating spaces for regional social-ecological systems
Glob. Environ. Chang.
(2014)
M. Gulati et al.
The water–energy–food security nexus: challenges and opportunities for food security in South Africa
Aquatic Procedia
(2013)
J. Gupta et al.
“Glocal” water governance: a multi-level challenge in the anthropocene
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2013)
C. Howarth et al.
Understanding barriers to decision making in the UK energy-food-water nexus: the added value of interdisciplinary approaches
Environ. Sci. Pol.
(2016)
R. Lawford et al.
Basin perspectives on the water–energy–food security nexus
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2013)
U. Lele et al.
Good governance for food, water and energy security
Aquatic Procedia
(2013)
A. Misselhorn et al.
A vision for attaining food security
Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.
(2012)

S. Nair et al.

Water–energy–greenhouse gas nexus of urban water systems: review of concepts, state-of-art and methods

Resour. Conserv. Recycl.

(2014)

C. Ringler et al.

The nexus across water, energy, land and food (WELF): potential for improved resource use efficiency?

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

(2013)

C.A. Scott et al.

Policy and institutional dimensions of the water–energy nexus

Energ Policy

(2011)

A. Siddiqi et al.

The water–energy nexus in Middle East and North Africa

Energy Policy

(2011)

P. Struik et al.

Deconstructing and unpacking scientific controversies in intensification and sustainability: why the tensions in concepts and values?

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

(2014)

R. Weijermars

Can we close Earth's sustainability gap?

Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev.

(2011)

Y.J. Yang et al.

Toward quantitative analysis of water-energy-urban-climate nexus for urban adaptation planning

Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering

(2014)

Y.C.E. Yang et al.

The future nexus of the Brahmaputra River Basin: climate, water, energy and food trajectories

Glob. Environ. Chang.

(2016)

J.A. Allan

Virtual water-the water, food, and trade nexus. Useful concept or misleading metaphor?

Water Int.

(2003)

T. Allan et al.

The water–food–energy nexus: an introduction to nexus concepts and some conceptual and operational problems

International Journal of Water Resources Development

(2015)

J. Allouche

The sustainability and resilience of global water and food systems: political analysis of the interplay between security, resource scarcity, political systems and global trade

Food Policy

(2011)

J. Allouche

Technical veil, hidden politics: interrogating the power linkages behind the nexus

Water Alternatives

(2015)

Allouche, J., Middleton, C., Gyawali, D. (2014). Water and the Nexus, Nexus Nirvana or Nexus Nullity? A Dynamic...

Andrews-Speed, P., Bleischwitz, R., Boersma, T., Johnson, C., Kemp, G., VanDeveer, S. D. (2012). The Global Resource...

M. Ariel

Planning for algal systems: an energy-water-food nexus perspective

Ind. Biotechnol.

(2014)

M.B. Beck et al.

On water security, sustainability, and the water-food-energy-climate nexus

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.

(2013)

A. Bell et al.

Opportunities for improved promotion of ecosystem services in agriculture under the water-energy-food nexus

J. Environ. Stud. Sci.

(2016)

D. Benson

Water governance in a comparative perspective: from IWRM to a “nexus” approach?

Water Alternatives

(2015)

Bizikova, L. (2014). Water-Energy-Food Nexus and Agricultural Investment: A Sustainable Development Guidebook | IISD....

R. Bleischwitz et al.

Re-assessing resource dependency and criticality. Linking future food and water stress with global resource supply vulnerabilities for foresight analysis

Eur. J. Futures Res.

(2014)

G. Bridge

Resource Geographies II: The Resource-state Nexus, in Progress in Human Geography

(2013)

V. Dakos et al.

Resilience indicators: prospects and limitations for early warnings of regime shifts

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

(2015)

M. Falkenmark et al.

Overcoming the land–water disconnect in water-scarce regions: time for IWRM to go contemporary

International Journal of Water Resources Development

(2014)

C. Folke et al.

Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability

Ecol. Soc.

(2010)

T. Foran

Node and regime: interdisciplinary analysis of water-energy-food nexus in the Mekong region

Water Alternatives

(2015)

M. Giampietro

Resource Accounting for Sustainability Assessment: The Nexus Between Energy, Food, Water and Land Use, Routledge Explorations in Sustainability and Governance

(2014)

P.H. Gleick

Water management: soft water paths

Nature

(2002)

P.H. Gleick

Global freshwater resources: soft-path solutions for the 21st century

Science

(2003)

Goga, S., Pegram, G. (2014). Water, Energy and Food: A Review of Integrated Planning in South Africa. Understanding the...

J. Gupta et al.

Policymakers' reflections on water governance issues

Ecol. Soc.

(2013)

Hoff, H. (2011). Understanding the NEXUS, Background Paper for the Bonn 2011 Conference: The Water, Energy and Food...

M. Howells et al.

Integrated analysis of climate change, land-use, energy and water strategies

Nat. Clim. Chang.

(2013)

Cited by (241)

A global review of urban blue-green planning tools
2024, Land Use Policy
State, city and local governments use environmental planning policies to guide development outcomes. Their policies operate within an increasingly complex regulatory environment and have proliferated as they seek to address past, present, and emerging land use challenges and shifting socio-ecological expectations. The development of integrated urban water (blue) and biodiversity (green) policies represents an example of policy alignment to reduce policy duplication and administrative costs, and to recognise the complementary benefits of land use changes. This paper presents a review of 12 urban blue-green policies, tracking their evolution and comparing five shared categories: vegetation, green infrastructure, surface treatments, water, and habitat. Results indicate that most policies have an emphasis on increasing vegetation cover. Policies that have been in place for longer are more likely to be mandatory requirements in the development assessment process. Newer policies, and those focused on specific precincts, tend to be discretionary and take a guidance approach. When each of the 12 policies are viewed over time, they fall into one of two policy evolutionary pathways. The first group has maintained a relatively small number of development controls or attributes, similar to those established by Berlin’s Biotope Area Factor tool. The others have significantly increased the number of attributes used, providing greater choice in how landscaping and water controls can be implemented, and so doing have increased their complexity. The specific attributes and their relative weighting within the policies vary, reflecting the prevailing regulatory systems and policy priorities of each city. Overall, each blue-green policy demonstrates the benefits of combining attributes to achieve mutually beneficial blue and green city outcomes. They also represent examples of policy integration.
Is it the behavior and actions of people that determine sustainable urban communities?
2024, Cities
This study aims to provide an analytical understanding of the primary evidence for making urban centers sustainable through channelizing people's preferences, behaviors, and actions toward sustainable urban communities. The structured questionnaire is used, which includes all possible dimensions to get the response from 361 households from Islamabad, the capital city of Pakistan. The Ordered Logistic Regression model is applied to analyze people's preferences, behaviors, and actions for sustainable urban communities. The results indicate that people's preferences, behavior, and actions toward water, energy conservation, and using recyclable products are likely to have a significant impact in determining urban sustainability communities. In comparison, food-related behaviors and actions are surprisingly weak in influencing urban sustainability communities. Thus, this study recommends implementing water metering, maximizing daylight use, a culture of energy-efficient buildings, and a smart public transportation system for sustainable urban communities besides awareness campaigns to influence people's preferences and behaviors.
Research on optimal allocation of soil and water resources based on water–energy–food–carbon nexus
2024, Journal of Cleaner Production
Current population growth and rapid urbanization in China have intensified the demand for water, energy, and food. This is threatening the intertwined global water, energy, and food security. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate interconnected and interdependent water, energy, food, and carbon policies. In this study, based on the theory of water–energy–food–carbon nexus, a soil and water resource optimization allocation model was developed by establishing an optimization modeling framework to achieve coordination between various sectors of water allocation. The model is an effective decision-making tool that fully considers the close relationship within the nexus system, and multiple uncertainty conditions. It was applied on the Fen River Basin in Shanxi Province as the study area, and a series of optimized allocation schemes were obtained. The results indicated that the current water allocation to each sector is meeting its minimum water demand. The planting structure optimization of two crops, wheat and corn, reduces the regional agricultural water consumption. For example, in dry years, the area of wheat cultivation (which needs more irrigation and has lower net economic benefits) is reduced and that of corn (which needs less irrigation and consumes less water) is increased in each subdistrict. The wheat plantation area in the midstream and downstream is decreased by 2.08% and 26.25%, respectively. The water use structure of crops indicated that precipitation and groundwater resources significantly contribute to the production of both crops throughout the entire growth process. This model can be applied in other regions; the model's economic and ecological benefits are combined so that decision makers can consider the stability of the water–energy–food–carbon system and provide optimal resource allocation under various scenarios, contributing to achieving the goal of sustainable development.
Water-energy-food planning and operations framework for river basins with a case study on the Blue Nile
2024, Journal of Hydrology
Infrastructure in river basins is essential to achieving several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including SDG 2 on zero hunger, SDG 6 on water and sanitation, and SDG 7 on affordable and clean energy. However, important tradeoffs and synergies need to be navigated across these goals as both water and resources for infrastructure investments are limited. In transboundary river basins, such tradeoffs can transcend countries, creating a complex, interconnected system of water-energy-food linkages. With increasing pressures on the Blue Nile’s water resources from population and economic growth and climate change, an analytical framework for joint planning of these essential human development goals at a fine temporal resolution and considering multi-national priorities can enhance the potential to achieve water, energy, and food security. In this study, we develop and apply a framework for water resources planning in the Blue Nile using four steps: (1) understanding the water-energy-food nexus management landscape through stakeholder engagement and literature review; (2) developing a detailed daily simulator that captures major nexus components and objectives at a fine temporal scale; (3) linking the simulator to an Artificial intelligence-based search algorithm to design efficient agricultural and dam operation portfolios considering national and sectoral priorities; and (4) presenting the results using interactive visualization tools to facilitate dialogue and support decisions. Our results identify efficient operation plans for large dams on the Blue Nile for alternative cropping patterns in expanded irrigation areas in Sudan that minimize tradeoffs across water, energy, and food objectives.
Modelling the system dynamics of household food, water, and energy nexus effects
2024, Heliyon
The food-energy-water nexus (F-E-W) serves as a crucial resource for the sustainability of households, while the efficiency of resource use largely depends on our understanding and management of the nexus including all three factors. Limited research has been conducted on this topic thus far because of the increasing complexity of home technologies and data availability. This study develops an evidence-based system dynamics model for assessing the synergy and trade-offs of the household F-E-W. By applying the system dynamics (SD) methodology, the FEW consumption and generation originating from home appliances were modelled and simulated. The model was applied to an eco-house in Tokyo, and its efficacy was validated with one-year hour-based observations of a home energy management system (HEMS). The findings revealed that water-related and food-related energy use accounted for approximately 55% of the total energy use. In addition, water-related energy use showed high uncertainty, suggesting a management potential of approximately 24% for reduction, and was significantly correlated with household carbon emissions. Moreover, this result verified that the effective management of household energy consumption requires the adept manipulation of the diverse array of energy sources employed for air and water heating, while HEMSs could play a key role in implementation.
Examining the coupling and coordination of water-energy-food nexus at a sub-national scale in India – Insights from the perspective of Sustainable Development Goals
2023, Sustainable Production and Consumption
The interconnected and interdependent nature of water, energy, and food (WEF), called the WEF nexus, is essential for achieving long-term sustainability in producing and consuming of these three resources. Coupling and coordination degrees, which describe the intensities of interdependence and cooperation between different system components, are convenient for evaluating and managing the WEF nexus for a region or a nation. Although coupling and coordination of WEF nexus evaluations are essential for sharing knowledge about WEF security challenges, none of the studies has examined how coupling and coordination of WEF nexus based on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) affects a country's regions. This study developed a Coupling Coordination Degree Model to examine the WEF nexus at India's sub-national (States/Union Territories) level for 2011 and 2021 and address the SDGs. The comprehensive evaluation index and coupling degree, representing the progress score of WEF security and interaction between the WEF security, respectively, were first determined for the core WEF nexus using 29 indicators based on SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation) and SDG 7 (cheap and clean energy). Subsequently, the degree of coordination reflecting the level of coordinated development on WEF sectors considering the governance, collaboration, and cooperation among stakeholders from different sectors was obtained. The results show that WEF components are strongly coupled with each other in all the Indian States/Union Territories. The results also show that the comprehensive evaluation index increased in 2021 compared to 2011, reflecting improved WEF security. However, the coordination degree of WEF security varied spatially and temporally, reflecting the variations in the coordination among the water, energy and food sectors in various Indian States/Union Territories. However, the coordination degree improved over the years, and consequently, 39 % of the States/Union Territories advanced from intermediate development in 2011 to good development in 2021. This study also identified the States/Union Territories of India that need improvement in the coordination degree of WEF security and suggested different WEF-related policies and programs for improvement. Results also identified that the development in the food sector (SDG 2) is superior to the water (SDG 6) and energy (SDG 7) sectors in most Indian States/Union Territories. This study may help administrators and policymakers identify the States/Union Territories requiring greater attention for implementing the existing or new policies to attain specific resource security.

View all citing articles on Scopus

¹: Current author's affiliation: Center for Sustainable Development, Qatar University, Qatar.

View full text

ReviewTowards understanding the integrative approach of the water, energy and food nexus

Highlights

Abstract

Graphical abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Drivers behind the nexus thinking

Nexus as an integration paradigm

Understandings of integration in the nexus paradigm

Initial evaluation

Conclusions

Acknowledgements

Energ Policy

Environ. Sci. Pol.

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Glob. Environ. Chang.

Aquatic Procedia

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Environ. Sci. Pol.

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Aquatic Procedia

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Resour. Conserv. Recycl.

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Energ Policy

Energy Policy

Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain.

Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev.

Current Opinion in Chemical Engineering

Glob. Environ. Chang.

Virtual water-the water, food, and trade nexus. Useful concept or misleading metaphor?

Water Int.

The water–food–energy nexus: an introduction to nexus concepts and some conceptual and operational problems

International Journal of Water Resources Development

The sustainability and resilience of global water and food systems: political analysis of the interplay between security, resource scarcity, political systems and global trade

Food Policy

Technical veil, hidden politics: interrogating the power linkages behind the nexus

Water Alternatives

Planning for algal systems: an energy-water-food nexus perspective

Ind. Biotechnol.

On water security, sustainability, and the water-food-energy-climate nexus

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.

Opportunities for improved promotion of ecosystem services in agriculture under the water-energy-food nexus

J. Environ. Stud. Sci.

Water governance in a comparative perspective: from IWRM to a “nexus” approach?

Water Alternatives

Re-assessing resource dependency and criticality. Linking future food and water stress with global resource supply vulnerabilities for foresight analysis

Eur. J. Futures Res.

Resource Geographies II: The Resource-state Nexus, in Progress in Human Geography

Resilience indicators: prospects and limitations for early warnings of regime shifts

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Overcoming the land–water disconnect in water-scarce regions: time for IWRM to go contemporary

International Journal of Water Resources Development

Resilience thinking: integrating resilience, adaptability and transformability

Ecol. Soc.

Node and regime: interdisciplinary analysis of water-energy-food nexus in the Mekong region

Water Alternatives

Resource Accounting for Sustainability Assessment: The Nexus Between Energy, Food, Water and Land Use, Routledge Explorations in Sustainability and Governance

Water management: soft water paths

Nature

Global freshwater resources: soft-path solutions for the 21st century

Science

Policymakers' reflections on water governance issues

Ecol. Soc.

Integrated analysis of climate change, land-use, energy and water strategies

Nat. Clim. Chang.

Review
Towards understanding the integrative approach of the water, energy and food nexus