IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v213y2019icp512-520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are water footprints accurate enough to be useful? A case study for maize (Zea mays L.)

Author

Listed:
  • van der Laan, M.
  • Jarmain, C.
  • Bastidas-Obando, E.
  • Annandale, J.G.
  • Fessehazion, M.
  • Haarhoff, D.

Abstract

The application of water footprint accounting is mostly done at large scales, but the estimation of crop- and region-specific water footprints for up-scaling is dependent on accurate and representative in-field measurements of evapotranspiration (ET), yield and irrigation. In a field trial we assessed the influence of maize (Zea mays L.) ET estimates using soil water balance accounting, remote sensing with satellite imagery (SEBAL model), eddy covariance measurements and three crop models (SWB, CROPWAT, SAPWAT) on water footprint estimates. We simultaneously assessed the influence of yield spatial variability as measured by a precision harvester. Seasonal ET estimations differed by as much as 15% for the different methods, and yield differed by as much as 42%, representing the error which can be introduced as a result of point measurements. Using a combination of the highest/lowest ET estimates and the 5th/95th percentile yield, water footprint values differed by as much as 100%, ranging from 338-680 m3 t−1. Applying spatially-linked SEBAL ET estimates and precision harvester yield at the 30 × 30 m scale reduced the range of estimated water footprints to 493-663 m3 t -1, with an average of 547 m3 t-1. This was 15% higher than the water footprint estimated using average SEBAL ET and average yield for the whole pivot (467 m3 t -1). Any error introduced at this stage of water footprint accounting can be transferred during up-scaling of the results. For example, based on the minimum and maximum estimated water footprints, maize production was expected to consume between 4.4 and 8.3%, respectively, of the Orange River (South Africa’s largest river) flow during the season in that region. Biophysical scientists have the role of providing high quality data for accurate water consumption estimates. Thereafter, their application by various stakeholders should be done with caution.

Suggested Citation

  • van der Laan, M. & Jarmain, C. & Bastidas-Obando, E. & Annandale, J.G. & Fessehazion, M. & Haarhoff, D., 2019. "Are water footprints accurate enough to be useful? A case study for maize (Zea mays L.)," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 512-520.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:213:y:2019:i:c:p:512-520
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.10.026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378377418306772
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2018.10.026?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. S. Sun & P. Wu & Y. Wang & X. Zhao, 2013. "Temporal Variability of Water Footprint for Maize Production: The Case of Beijing from 1978 to 2008," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(7), pages 2447-2463, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tomaz, Alexandra & Palma, José Ferro & Ramos, Tiago & Costa, Maria Natividade & Rosa, Elizabete & Santos, Marta & Boteta, Luís & Dôres, José & Patanita, Manuel, 2021. "Yield, technological quality and water footprints of wheat under Mediterranean climate conditions: A field experiment to evaluate the effects of irrigation and nitrogen fertilization strategies," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 258(C).
    2. Zheng, Jing & Fan, Junliang & Zhang, Fucang & Wu, Lifeng & Zou, Yufeng & Zhuang, Qianlai, 2021. "Estimation of rainfed maize transpiration under various mulching methods using modified Jarvis-Stewart model and hybrid support vector machine model with whale optimization algorithm," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 249(C).
    3. Wang, Linlin & Li, Lingling & Xie, Junhong & Luo, Zhuzhu & Sumera, Anwar & Zechariah, Effah & Fudjoe, Setor Kwami & Palta, Jairo A. & Chen, Yinglong, 2022. "Does plastic mulching reduce water footprint in field crops in China? A meta-analysis," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    4. Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe & Dirwai, Tinashe Lindel & Taguta, Cuthbert & Sikka, Alok & Lautze, Jonathan, 2023. "Mapping Decision Support Tools (DSTs) on agricultural water productivity: A global systematic scoping review," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 290(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julian Fulton & Heather Cooley & Peter Gleick, 2014. "Water Footprint Outcomes and Policy Relevance Change with Scale Considered: Evidence from California," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(11), pages 3637-3649, September.
    2. Rodrigo Gil & Carlos Ricardo Bojacá & Eddie Schrevens, 2017. "Uncertainty of the Agricultural Grey Water Footprint Based on High Resolution Primary Data," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 31(11), pages 3389-3400, September.
    3. Inas El-Gafy, 2014. "System Dynamic Model for Crop Production, Water Footprint, and Virtual Water Nexus," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(13), pages 4467-4490, October.
    4. Xian Liu, 2022. "Analysis of Crop Sustainability Production Potential in Northwest China: Water Resources Perspective," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-17, October.
    5. Fei Yin & Chang-xin Xu, 2020. "Quantifying the Inter- and Intra-Annual Variations in Regional Water Consumption and Scarcity Incorporating Water Quantity and Quality," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 34(8), pages 2313-2327, June.
    6. Xiaoxue Zheng & Lijie Qin & Hongshi He, 2020. "Impacts of Climatic and Agricultural Input Factors on the Water Footprint of Crop Production in Jilin Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-19, August.
    7. Rodríguez, Paula Olivera & Holzman, Mauro Ezequiel & Aldaya, Maite M. & Rivas, Raúl Eduardo, 2024. "Water footprint in rainfed summer and winter crops: The role of soil moisture," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 296(C).
    8. Wang, Lei & Li, Lianqing & Cheng, Kun & Pan, Genxing, 2019. "Comprehensive evaluation of environmental footprints of regional crop production: A case study of Chizhou City, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    9. T. R. Sreeshna & P. Athira & B. Soundharajan, 2024. "Impact of Climate Change on Regional Water Availability and Demand for Agricultural Production: Application of Water Footprint Concept," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 38(10), pages 3785-3817, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:213:y:2019:i:c:p:512-520. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.