IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v172y2020ics0921800918314393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing the economic value of virtual water with volumetric and stress-weighted approaches: A case for the tea supply chain

Author

Listed:
  • Lowe, Benjamin H.
  • Oglethorpe, David R.
  • Choudhary, Sonal

Abstract

In this paper, we employ a new approach to assessing the impact and efficiency of virtual water use along the supply chain. This approach involves estimating the economic value of virtual water flows. A realistic tea supply chain case study is presented to test this new approach and compare it with alternative volumetric and stress-weighted methods. The case study is used to highlight the total value of the blue and grey water used to produce 1 tonne of tea as a finished good ($224). The case study also illustrates how variations in the relative unit value of water between geographies, in this case between multiple locations where crops are cultivated (India $0.08 m3, Indonesia $0.09 m3 and Kenya $0.27 m3), can be used to inform supply chain optimisation and allocative efficiency. Indeed, the case study suggests that taking into account the economic value of virtual water may provide differing prescriptions for the sustainable management of supply chains when compared to the traditional volumetric water footprint, and the stress-weighted water footprint used in LCA.

Suggested Citation

  • Lowe, Benjamin H. & Oglethorpe, David R. & Choudhary, Sonal, 2020. "Comparing the economic value of virtual water with volumetric and stress-weighted approaches: A case for the tea supply chain," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:172:y:2020:i:c:s0921800918314393
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106572
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800918314393
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106572?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. Aldaya, M.M. & Allan, J.A. & Hoekstra, A.Y., 2010. "Strategic importance of green water in international crop trade," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 887-894, February.
    2. Bergstrom, John C. & Taylor, Laura O., 2006. "Using meta-analysis for benefits transfer: Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 351-360, December.
    3. Czajkowski, Mikolaj & Scasný, Milan, 2010. "Study on benefit transfer in an international setting. How to improve welfare estimates in the case of the countries' income heterogeneity?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 2409-2416, October.
    4. Rodgers, Charles & Hellegers, Petra J.G.J., 2005. "Water pricing and valuation in Indonesia: case study of the Brantas River Basin," EPTD discussion papers 141, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    5. Allan, Tony, 1999. "Productive efficiency and allocative efficiency: why better water management may not solve the problem," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 71-75, March.
    6. Wilson, Matthew A. & Hoehn, John P., 2006. "Valuing environmental goods and services using benefit transfer: The state-of-the art and science," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 335-342, December.
    7. World Bank, 2016. "World Development Indicators 2016," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 23969, December.
    8. Pate, Jennifer & Loomis, John, 1997. "The effect of distance on willingness to pay values: a case study of wetlands and salmon in California," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 199-207, March.
    9. Aldaya, M.M. & Hoekstra, A.Y., 2010. "The water needed for Italians to eat pasta and pizza," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 103(6), pages 351-360, July.
    10. Hellegers, Petra J.G.J. & Perry, Christopher J., 2004. "Water As An Economic Good In Irrigated Agriculture: Theory And Practice," Report Series 29109, Wageningen University and Research Center, Agricultural Economics Research Institute.
    11. Richardson, Leslie & Loomis, John & Kroeger, Timm & Casey, Frank, 2015. "The role of benefit transfer in ecosystem service valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 51-58.
    12. A. Ercin & Maite Aldaya & Arjen Hoekstra, 2011. "Corporate Water Footprint Accounting and Impact Assessment: The Case of the Water Footprint of a Sugar-Containing Carbonated Beverage," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 25(2), pages 721-741, January.
    13. Hua Wang & Somik Lall, 2002. "Valuing water for Chinese industries: a marginal productivity analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(6), pages 759-765.
    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. Sachin Kumar Mangla & Yiğit Kazançoğlu & Abdullah Yıldızbaşı & Cihat Öztürk & Ahmet Çalık, 2022. "A conceptual framework for blockchain‐based sustainable supply chain and evaluating implementation barriers: A case of the tea supply chain," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 3693-3716, December.
    2. Paul, Tripti & Mondal, Sandeep & Islam, Nazrul & Rakshit, Sandip, 2021. "The impact of blockchain technology on the tea supply chain and its sustainable performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(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. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Maria L. Loureiro & Ståle Navrud & John Rolfe, 2021. "Guidance to Enhance the Validity and Credibility of Environmental Benefit Transfers," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 79(3), pages 575-624, July.
    2. Meya, Jasper N. & Drupp, Moritz A. & Hanley, Nick, 2021. "Testing structural benefit transfer: The role of income inequality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Mazzotta, Marisa & Wainger, Lisa & Sifleet, Samantha & Petty, J.Todd & Rashleigh, Brenda, 2015. "Benefit transfer with limited data: An application to recreational fishing losses from surface mining," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 384-398.
    4. Van Houtven, George L. & Pattanayak, Subhrendu K. & Usmani, Faraz & Yang, Jui-Chen, 2017. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Improved Water Access? Results from a Meta-Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 126-135.
    5. Newbold, Stephen C. & Johnston, Robert J., 2020. "Valuing non-market valuation studies using meta-analysis: A demonstration using estimates of willingness-to-pay for water quality improvements," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Frélichová, Jana & VaÄ kář, David & Pártl, Adam & LouÄ ková, Blanka & HarmÃ¡Ä ková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, EliÅ¡ka, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    7. María Jesús Beltrán & Esther Velázquez, 2011. "Del metabolismo social al metabolismo hídrico," Documentos de Trabajo de la Asociación de Economía Ecológica en España 01_2011, Asociación de Economía Ecológica en España.
    8. Jasper N. Meya, 2018. "Environmental Inequality and Economic Valuation," Working Papers V-416-18, University of Oldenburg, Department of Economics, revised Dec 2018.
    9. Chen, Haojie, 2020. "Complementing conventional environmental impact assessments of tourism with ecosystem service valuation: A case study of the Wulingyuan Scenic Area, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    10. Shuang Liu & David I Stern, 2008. "A Meta-Analysis of Contingent Valuation Studies in Coastal and Near-Shore Marine Ecosystems," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2008-15, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    11. Marta Antonelli & Luca Fernando Ruini, 2015. "Business Engagement with Sustainable Water Resource Management through Water Footprint Accounting: The Case of the Barilla Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-17, May.
    12. Artell, Janne & Ahtiainen, Heini & Pouta, Eija, 2019. "Distance decay and regional statistics in international benefit transfer," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Wilker, Jost & Rusche, Karsten & Benning, Alexander & MacDonald, Michael A. & Blaen, Phillip, 2016. "Applying ecosystem benefit valuation to inform quarry restoration planning," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 44-55.
    14. Han-Shen Chen, 2015. "Using Water Footprints for Examining the Sustainable Development of Science Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-21, May.
    15. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Ahtiainen, Heini & Artell, Janne & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2017. "Choosing a Functional Form for an International Benefit Transfer: Evidence from a Nine-country Valuation Experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 104-113.
    16. Robert J. Johnston & Elena Y. Besedin & Benedict M. Holland, 2019. "Modeling Distance Decay Within Valuation Meta-Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 72(3), pages 657-690, March.
    17. Anna Széchy & Zsuzsanna Szerényi, 2023. "Valuing the Recreational Services Provided by Hungary’s Forest Ecosystems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, February.
    18. Quynh, Chi Nguyen Thi & Schilizzi, Steven & Hailu, Atakelty & Iftekhar, Sayed, 2018. "Fishers' Preference Heterogeneity and Trade-offs Between Design Options for More Effective Monitoring of Fisheries," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 22-33.
    19. S Sha Hussain Yacob Khan, 2018. "Virtual Water: The Exploitation of The Elixir of Life thru The Invisible Treasure Trade," Shanlax International Journal of Economics, Shanlax Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 9-13, December.
    20. Dupoux, Marion & Martinet, Vincent, 2022. "Could the environment be a normal good for you and an inferior good for me? A theory of context-dependent substitutability and needs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).

    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:ecolec:v:172:y:2020:i:c:s0921800918314393. 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/ecolecon .

    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.