IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i23p9921-d452136.html

Sustainable Application of Livestock Water Footprints in Different Beef Production Systems of South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Ayanda M. Ngxumeshe

    (Tshwane University of Technology, Faculty of Science, Department of Animal Sciences, Staatsartilerie Road, Pretoria Campus, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa)

  • Motshekwe Ratsaka

    (Tshwane University of Technology, Faculty of Science, Department of Animal Sciences, Staatsartilerie Road, Pretoria Campus, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa)

  • Bohani Mtileni

    (Tshwane University of Technology, Faculty of Science, Department of Animal Sciences, Staatsartilerie Road, Pretoria Campus, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa)

  • Khathutshelo Nephawe

    (Tshwane University of Technology, Faculty of Science, Department of Animal Sciences, Staatsartilerie Road, Pretoria Campus, Private Bag X680, Pretoria 0001, South Africa)

Abstract

There is an increase in requirement and competition for water, while water resources are decreasing at an accelerating rate. Agriculture is the biggest consumer of water and therefore has the largest water footprint, which is not yet known. The largest portion is acknowledged to be for producing animal products. Water footprints account for the amounts of water used to produce a commodity for consumption, measured along the commodity life cycle. Water withdrawals from surface and groundwater are accounted for when assessing the water footprint. The three identified major determinants of a water footprint of meat include feed conversion efficiency (FCE), feed composition, and feed origin, with the first two being influenced greatly by the animal production system. In South Africa (SA), the two distinct production systems are the intensive and extensive production systems. Intensifying beef animals improves FCE due to faster growths per kg feed consumed, reduced activity, and therefore reduced water footprint. Beef cattle in the extensive system consume a large component of roughages, while the intensive system has a high concentrate to roughage ratio. This theoretically increases the water footprint in the intensive system. The literature indicates large amounts of volumetric water footprint indicators of boneless beef in SA. Water footprint assessment is critical for enabling consumers to make well-informed and sound decisions when considering changes in their behavior due to the effect this has on social, economic, and environmental wellbeing. This paper aims to postulate the various issues associated with water usage in beef production. These include factors affecting the water footprint of beef production and the effects it has on various aspects of both the environment and social wellbeing. It further explores the various methods to assess the water footprint of a product.

Suggested Citation

  • Ayanda M. Ngxumeshe & Motshekwe Ratsaka & Bohani Mtileni & Khathutshelo Nephawe, 2020. "Sustainable Application of Livestock Water Footprints in Different Beef Production Systems of South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-13, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:23:p:9921-:d:452136
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/23/9921/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/23/9921/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Owusu-Sekyere, Enoch & Scheepers, Morné Erwin & Jordaan, Henry, 2017. "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, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 22-28.
    2. Reimer, Jeffrey J., 2012. "On the economics of virtual water trade," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 135-139.
    3. Mark A. Sutton & Oene Oenema & Jan Willem Erisman & Adrian Leip & Hans van Grinsven & Wilfried Winiwarter, 2011. "Too much of a good thing," Nature, Nature, vol. 472(7342), pages 159-161, April.
    4. repec:iwt:bosers:h040193 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Mpandeli, S. & Naidoo, D. & Mabhaudhi, T. & Nhemachena, Charles & Nhamo, Luxon & Liphadzi, S. & Hlahla, S. & Modi, A. T., "undated". "Climate change adaptation through the water-energy-food nexus in southern Africa," Papers published in Journals (Open Access) H048960, International Water Management Institute.
    6. Olusola Oluwayemisi Ololade, 2018. "Understanding the nexus between energy and water: A basis for human survival in South Africa," Development Southern Africa, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(2), pages 194-209, March.
    7. Chapagain, A.K. & Hoekstra, A.Y., 2011. "The blue, green and grey water footprint of rice from production and consumption perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 749-758, February.
    8. repec:iwt:bosers:h039769 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Frikkie Alberts Maré & Henry Jordaan, 2021. "The Water Footprint of Primary and Secondary Processing of Beef from Different Cattle Breeds: A Value Fraction Allocation Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Shahida Anusha Siddiqui & Özge Süfer & Gülşah Çalışkan Koç & Hanif Lutuf & Teguh Rahayu & Roberto Castro-Muñoz & Ito Fernando, 2025. "Enhancing the bioconversion rate and end products of black soldier fly (BSF) treatment – A comprehensive review," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(5), pages 9673-9741, May.

    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. Chen, Rui & Adu, Derick T. & Li, Wenying & Wilson, Norbert L.W., 2024. "Virtual water trade: Does bilateral tariff matter?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    2. GhassemiSahebi, Fakhroddin & Mohammadrezapour, Omolbani & Delbari, Masoomeh & KhasheiSiuki, Abbas & Ritzema, Henk & Cherati, Ali, 2020. "Effect of utilization of treated wastewater and seawater with Clinoptilolite-Zeolite on yield and yield components of sorghum," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    3. Guangyao Deng & Liujuan Wang & Yanan Song, 2015. "Effect of Variation of Water-Use Efficiency on Structure of Virtual Water Trade - Analysis Based on Input–Output Model," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 29(8), pages 2947-2965, June.
    4. Olusola O. Ololade & Palesa P. Rametse, 2018. "Determining factors that enable managers to implement an environmental management system for sustainable construction: A case study in Johannesburg," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(8), pages 1720-1732, December.
    5. Tirgari, Mohammad & Nejadhashemi, A. Pouyan & Marquart-Pyatt, Sandra, 2026. "A new Procedure for Determining Economic and Non-economic Zones of Production Function for Nitrogen Fertilizer Input," 2026 Annual Meeting, July 26 - 28, 2026, Kansas City, Missouri 404782, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    6. Namra Ghaffar & Bushra Noreen & Maryam Muhammad Ali & Amna Ali, 2021. "Rice Yield Estimation in Sawat Region Incorporating The Local Physio-Climatic Parameters," International Journal of Agriculture & Sustainable Development, 50sea, vol. 3(2), pages 46-50, June.
    7. Vogel, Everton & Martinelli, Gabrielli & Artuzo, Felipe Dalzotto, 2021. "Environmental and economic performance of paddy field-based crop-livestock systems in Southern Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    8. Sang-Hyun Lee & Makoto Taniguchi & Rabi H. Mohtar & Jin-Yong Choi & Seung-Hwan Yoo, 2018. "An Analysis of the Water-Energy-Food-Land Requirements and CO 2 Emissions for Food Security of Rice in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Changfeng Shi & Hang Yuan & Qinghua Pang & Yangyang Zhang, 2020. "Research on the Decoupling of Water Resources Utilization and Agricultural Economic Development in Gansu Province from the Perspective of Water Footprint," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-16, August.
    10. Li, Lu & Zhou, Yan & Li, Mo & Cao, Kaihua & Tao, Yanhuai & Liu, Yangdachuan, 2022. "Integrated modelling for cropping pattern optimization and planning considering the synergy of water resources-society-economy-ecology-environment system," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 271(C).
    11. repec:iwt:bosers:h051652 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Meyer-Aurich, Andreas & Karatay, Yusuf Nadi, 2019. "Effects of uncertainty and farmers' risk aversion on optimal N fertilizer supply in wheat production in Germany," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 130-139.
    13. Naidoo, Dhesigen & Nhamo, Luxon & Mpandeli, Sylvester & Sobratee, Nafisa & Senzanje, Aidan & Liphadzi, Stanley & Slotow, Rob & Jacobson, Michael & Modi, Albert T. & Mabhaudhi, Tafadzwanashe, 2021. "Operationalising the water-energy-food nexus through the theory of change," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    14. Boyu Wang & Xiang Gao, 2021. "Temporal and spatial variations of water resources constraint intensity on urbanization in the Shiyang River Basin, China," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10038-10055, July.
    15. Ik Kim & Kyung-shin Kim, 2019. "Estimation of Water Footprint for Major Agricultural and Livestock Products in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-16, May.
    16. Joel O. Botai & Christina M. Botai & Katlego P. Ncongwane & Sylvester Mpandeli & Luxon Nhamo & Muthoni Masinde & Abiodun M. Adeola & Michael G. Mengistu & Henerica Tazvinga & Miriam D. Murambadoro & S, 2021. "A Review of the Water–Energy–Food Nexus Research in Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-26, February.
    17. Abay, Kibrom A. & Chamberlin, Jordan & Chivenge, Pauline & Spielman, David J., 2025. "Fertilizer, soil health, and economic shocks: A synthesis of recent evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    18. Simon Anastasiadis & Marie-Laure Nauleau & Suzi Kerr & Tim Cox & Kit Rutherford, 2011. "Does Complex Hydrology Require Complex Water Quality Policy? NManager Simulations for Lake Rotorua," Motu Working Papers 11_14, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.
    19. Ledgard, Stewart F. & Wei, Sha & Wang, Xiaoqin & Falconer, Shelley & Zhang, Nannan & Zhang, Xiying & Ma, Lin, 2019. "Nitrogen and carbon footprints of dairy farm systems in China and New Zealand, as influenced by productivity, feed sources and mitigations," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 155-163.
    20. Kuzior, Aleksandra & Huzenko, Maksym & Stoyanets, Nataliya & Churikanova, Olena & Vasylieva, Tetiana, . "Impact of fertilisers on drinking water quality in Europe: implications for sustainable agriculture," Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, vol. 11(2).
    21. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:23:p:9921-:d:452136. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.