A blue/green water‐based accounting framework for assessment of water security

A comprehensive assessment of water security can incorporate several water‐related concepts, while accounting for Blue and Green Water (BW and GW) types defined in accordance with the hydrological processes involved. Here we demonstrate how a quantitative analysis of provision probability and use of BW and GW can be conducted, so as to provide indicators of water scarcity and vulnerability at the basin level. To illustrate the approach, we use the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) to model the hydrology of an agricultural basin (291 km2) within the Cantareira Water Supply System in Brazil. To provide a more comprehensive basis for decision making, we analyze the BW and GW‐Footprint components against probabilistic levels (50th and 30th percentile) of freshwater availability for human activities, during a 23 year period. Several contrasting situations of BW provision are distinguished, using different hydrological‐based methodologies for specifying monthly Environmental Flow Requirements (EFRs), and the risk of natural EFR violation is evaluated by use of a freshwater provision index. Our results reveal clear spatial and temporal patterns of water scarcity and vulnerability levels within the basin. Taking into account conservation targets for the basin, it appears that the more restrictive EFR methods are more appropriate than the method currently employed at the study basin. The blue/green water‐based accounting framework developed here provides a useful integration of hydrologic, ecosystem and human needs information on a monthly basis, thereby improving our understanding of how and where water‐related threats to human and aquatic ecosystem security can arise.

[1]  Martin Volk,et al.  Land use change in a 200‐year period and its effect on blue and green water flow in two Slovenian Mediterranean catchments—lessons for the future , 2013 .

[2]  M. Hipsey,et al.  “Panta Rhei—Everything Flows”: Change in hydrology and society—The IAHS Scientific Decade 2013–2022 , 2013 .

[3]  I. Chaubey,et al.  A quantitative approach to evaluating ecosystem services , 2013 .

[4]  Bruno Marcos,et al.  Can we infer about ecosystem services from EIA and SEA practice? A framework for analysis and examples from Portugal , 2013 .

[5]  H.A.J. van Lanen,et al.  Making the distinction between water scarcity and drought using an observation‐modeling framework , 2013 .

[6]  Gregg M. Garfin,et al.  Water Security and Adaptive Management in the Arid Americas , 2013 .

[7]  J. Padowski,et al.  Water availability and vulnerability of 225 large cities in the United States , 2012 .

[8]  Yi-Wen Chiu,et al.  Quantifying the regional water footprint of biofuel production by incorporating hydrologic modeling , 2012 .

[9]  Brian Richter,et al.  A PRESUMPTIVE STANDARD FOR ENVIRONMENTAL FLOW PROTECTION , 2012 .

[10]  A. Griensven,et al.  Critical review of SWAT applications in the upper Nile basin countries , 2012 .

[11]  Karen Bakker,et al.  Water Security: Research Challenges and Opportunities , 2012, Science.

[12]  Arjen Ysbert Hoekstra,et al.  Assessing water footprint at river basin level: a case study for the Heihe River Basin in northwest China , 2012 .

[13]  A. Hoekstra,et al.  Global Monthly Water Scarcity: Blue Water Footprints versus Blue Water Availability , 2012, PloS one.

[14]  R. Wilby,et al.  Smart licensing and environmental flows: Modeling framework and sensitivity testing , 2011 .

[15]  C. Schaefer,et al.  ATRIBUTOS FÍSICO-HIDRICOS E CARBONO ORGÂNICO DE UM ARGISSOLO APÓS 23 ANOS DE DIFERENTES MANEJOS , 2011 .

[16]  Mark Zeitoun,et al.  The Global Web of National Water Security , 2011 .

[17]  Matthew Egan,et al.  The Water Footprint Assessment Manual. Setting the Global Standard , 2011 .

[18]  Rolf Weingartner,et al.  Global monthly water stress: 2. Water demand and severity of water stress , 2011 .

[19]  M. Jha Evaluating Hydrologic Response of an Agricultural Watershed for Watershed Analysis , 2011 .

[20]  P. Polglase,et al.  Modeling changes in organic carbon stocks for distinct soils in southeastern brazil after four eucalyptus rotations using the century model , 2011 .

[21]  Caroline A Sullivan,et al.  Quantifying water vulnerability: a multi-dimensional approach , 2011 .

[22]  M. Aldaya,et al.  The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard , 2011 .

[23]  Cristina Madrid,et al.  Rethinking the Concepts of Virtual Water and Water Footprint in Relation to the Production–Consumption Binomial and the Water–Energy Nexus , 2011 .

[24]  J. Rockström,et al.  Building Water Resilience in the Face of Global Change: From a Blue-Only to a Green-Blue Water Approach to Land-Water Management , 2010 .

[25]  P. McIntyre,et al.  Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity , 2010, Nature.

[26]  Yi Zhang,et al.  Accounting for ecosystem services in life cycle assessment, Part I: a critical review. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[27]  Jeffrey G. Arnold,et al.  Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) Model: Current Developments and Applications , 2010 .

[28]  .. Brasil.AgênciaNacionaldeÁguas Atlas Brasil : abastecimento urbano de água , 2009 .

[29]  Hoshin Vijai Gupta,et al.  Decomposition of the mean squared error and NSE performance criteria: Implications for improving hydrological modelling , 2009 .

[30]  J. Rockström,et al.  Future water availability for global food production: The potential of green water for increasing resilience to global change , 2009 .

[31]  Jay O'Keeffe Sustaining river ecosystems: balancing use and protection , 2009 .

[32]  Raghavan Srinivasan,et al.  Evaluation of global optimization algorithms for parameter calibration of a computationally intensive hydrologic model , 2009 .

[33]  N. Eriyagama,et al.  Developing a software package for global desktop assessment of environmental flows , 2008, Environ. Model. Softw..

[34]  F. Freire,et al.  Fracionamento químico e físico do carbono orgânico total em um solo de mata submetido a diferentes usos , 2008 .

[35]  Therese M Mulvey,et al.  Sink or Swim. , 2008, Journal of oncology practice.

[36]  K. Abbaspour,et al.  Estimation of freshwater availability in the West African sub-continent using the SWAT hydrologic model , 2008 .

[37]  David Grey,et al.  Sink or Swim? Water security for growth and development , 2007 .

[38]  I. Calder Forests and water—Ensuring forest benefits outweigh water costs , 2007 .

[39]  T. McMahon,et al.  Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification , 2007 .

[40]  Jenq-Tzong Shiau,et al.  Pareto‐optimal solutions for environmental flow schemes incorporating the intra‐annual and interannual variability of the natural flow regime , 2007 .

[41]  Jeffrey G. Arnold,et al.  The Soil and Water Assessment Tool: Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions , 2007 .

[42]  M. Whately,et al.  Cantareira 2006: um olhar sobre o maior manancial de água da Região Metropolitana de São Paulo; resultados do diagnóstico socioambiental participativo do Sistema Cantareira , 2007 .

[43]  Jeffrey G. Arnold,et al.  Model Evaluation Guidelines for Systematic Quantification of Accuracy in Watershed Simulations , 2007 .

[44]  W. Rawls,et al.  Soil Water Characteristic Estimates by Texture and Organic Matter for Hydrologic Solutions , 2006 .

[45]  S. Kanae,et al.  Global Hydrological Cycles and World Water Resources , 2006, Science.

[46]  J. Rockström,et al.  The New Blue and Green Water Paradigm: Breaking New Ground for Water Resources Planning and Management , 2006 .

[47]  Assefa M. Melesse,et al.  Influences of Potential Evapotranspiration Estimation Methods on SWAT's Hydrologic Simulation in a Northwestern Minnesota Watershed , 2006 .

[48]  K. Saxton,et al.  The SPAW Model for Agricultural Field and Pond Hydrologic Simulation , 2006 .

[49]  P. Krause,et al.  COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT EFFICIENCY CRITERIA FOR HYDROLOGICAL MODEL ASSESSMENT , 2005 .

[50]  T. D. Mitchell,et al.  Ecosystem Service Supply and Vulnerability to Global Change in Europe , 2005, Science.

[51]  Indrajeet Chaubey,et al.  SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, CALIBRATION, AND VALIDATIONS FOR A MULTISITE AND MULTIVARIABLE SWAT MODEL 1 , 2005 .

[52]  A. M. Genovez,et al.  Classificação Hidrológica de Solos Brasileiros para a Estimativa da Chuva Excedente com o Método do Serviço de Conservação do Solo dos Estados Unidos Parte 2: Aplicação , 2005 .

[53]  K. Abbaspour,et al.  Estimating Uncertain Flow and Transport Parameters Using a Sequential Uncertainty Fitting Procedure , 2004 .

[54]  Petra Döll,et al.  A Pilot Global Assessment of Environmental Water Requirements and Scarcity , 2004 .

[55]  A. D. Benetti,et al.  Current practices for establishing environmental flows in Brazil , 2004 .

[56]  R. Tharme A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: emerging trends in the development and application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers , 2003 .

[57]  Christine F. Reilly,et al.  Estimation of 7‐day, 10‐year low‐streamflow statistics using baseflow correlation , 2003 .

[58]  D. Legates,et al.  Interannual and seasonal variability of modelled soil moisture in Oklahoma , 2003 .

[59]  Denis A. Hughes,et al.  A desktop model used to provide an initial estimate of the ecological instream flow requirements of rivers in South Africa , 2003 .

[60]  A. Hoekstra Virtual water trade : A quantification of virtual water flows between nations in relation to international crop trade , 2003 .

[61]  H. G. Santos,et al.  The Brazilian Soil Classification System , 2002 .

[62]  R. L. Porto,et al.  Planning as a Tool to Deal with Extreme Events , 2002 .

[63]  F. Nachtergaele Soil taxonomy—a basic system of soil classification for making and interpreting soil surveys: Second edition, by Soil Survey Staff, 1999, USDA–NRCS, Agriculture Handbook number 436, Hardbound , 2001 .

[64]  Jan Seibert,et al.  Regionalisation of parameters for a conceptual rainfall-runoff model , 1999 .

[65]  J. Arnold,et al.  AUTOMATED METHODS FOR ESTIMATING BASEFLOW AND GROUND WATER RECHARGE FROM STREAMFLOW RECORDS 1 , 1999 .

[66]  Soroosh Sorooshian,et al.  Status of Automatic Calibration for Hydrologic Models: Comparison with Multilevel Expert Calibration , 1999 .

[67]  D. Legates,et al.  Evaluating the use of “goodness‐of‐fit” Measures in hydrologic and hydroclimatic model validation , 1999 .

[68]  Monica Ferreira do Amaral Porto,et al.  The Brazilian Water Law: A New Level of Participation and Decision Making , 1998 .

[69]  John R. Williams,et al.  LARGE AREA HYDROLOGIC MODELING AND ASSESSMENT PART I: MODEL DEVELOPMENT 1 , 1998 .

[70]  Ronald A. Sloto,et al.  HYSEP: A Computer Program for Streamflow Hydrograph Separation and Analysis , 1996 .

[71]  Peter M. Allen,et al.  Automated Base Flow Separation and Recession Analysis Techniques , 1995 .

[72]  V. Singh,et al.  The EPIC model. , 1995 .

[73]  John R. Williams,et al.  EPIC-erosion/productivity impact calculator: 1. Model documentation. , 1990 .

[74]  Andrew N. Sharpley,et al.  EPIC, Erosion/Productivity Impact Calculator , 1990 .

[75]  W. Rawls,et al.  Estimating generalized soil-water characteristics from texture , 1986 .

[76]  F. Beinroth Relationships between U.S. soil taxonomy, the Brazilian soil classification system, and FAO/UNESCO [Food and Agriculture Organization/United Nations, Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization] soil units , 1975 .

[77]  J. Nash,et al.  River flow forecasting through conceptual models part I — A discussion of principles☆ , 1970 .

[78]  Joint Fao,et al.  Training manual on food irradiation technology and techniques : a joint undertaking by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency , 1970 .

[79]  J. Monteith Evaporation and environment. , 1965, Symposia of the Society for Experimental Biology.