WRC Project No. K5/2099

SA Water Footprints: Key Insights to Case Studies

Global Water Risk ‘More than half of Global 500 respondents (53%) have experienced

detrimental water-related business impacts . . . as as high as US$200 million

(…and)

more respondents (68%) report exposure to water-related risks’

CDP Water Disclosure, 2012

What was this project about?

How Water Footprints can be carried out by

South African corporates?

agriculture and the industrial sector

Examine case studies

Present key insights and take away messages

Water Risks facing Business

Why do a water footprint?

Enterprise risk

Disclosure

Regulatory engagement

WF for SA

Green water, 45 927

Blue water, 7 123

Grey water, 5 803

South Africa: WF of National Production

(Mm3/yr)

Crop Production, 35027

Animal Supply, 10901

Domestic, 0

Industry, 0

Green WF (Mm3/yr)

Crop Production, 6412

Animal Supply,

282

Domestic, 390

Industry, 38

Blue WF (Mm3/yr)

Crop Production, 3126 Animal

Supply, 0

Domestic, 2368

Industry, 309

Grey WF (Mm3/yr)

Economy of South Africa

Agriculture, forestry and

fishing 3% Mining and quarry

6%

Manufacturing 17%

Electricity, gas and water 2%

Construction 4%

Wholesale, retail and motor trade,

catering and accommodation

13%

Transport, storage and

communication 10%

Finance, real estate and

business services 24%

General government

services 15%

Personal services 6%

Economy of South Africa

Agriculture, forestry and

fishing 3% Mining and quarry

6%

Manufacturing 17%

Electricity, gas and water 2%

Economy of South Africa

Agriculture, forestry and

fishing 3% Mining and quarry

6%

Manufacturing 17%

Electricity, gas and water 2%

Finance, real estate and

business services 24%

Key Sectors Explored

Agricultural products

(apples, pears & grapes)

Processing

Blue, green & grey WF

Extractive component

Chemical industry

Blue & grey WF

Agricultural goods

(Carrots & beans)

Processed goods (cheese)

Manufacturing & downstream use

(dishwashing liquid)

Blue, green & grey WF

Extractive component

Energy industry

Blue & grey WF

Economic contributor

Agriculture

Extractives

Manufacturing

Water Use in the Supply Chain

Manufacturing

/ Production Inputs

Distribution &

Sale

Consumer

Use

Company

WF

Facility

WF(s)

Product

WF(s)

SA Water Footprint Path

Key Challenges and Insights

Truncation of the supply chain

Type of water footprint: blue, green or grey

Defined time period

Production versus consumption

Buy-in from high level water managers

Agreement on data sharing

Key Challenges and Insights

Identifying the data you need & collecting it

Insufficient data & data accuracy

Chain summation vs step-wise cumulative approach

Examine every water footprint on its own merit

Attribution of water footprint

Interpretation of the Grey Water Footprint

Key Challenges and Insights

Environmental Indicators

Economic and Social Indicators

Key Challenges and Insights

Local

Government Communities,

CBOs & NGOs

Water User

Associations

Basin

Authorities

Stakeholder

Platforms

Water Ministries

& National Government Provincial/State

Government

Water

Utilities

Water Footprint

Assessment

Informative

Integrative

Collaborative

Consultative

Dependency

LOW

HIG

H

Internal Interest/Capacity RequirementEx

tern

al In

tere

st /

Cap

acit

y R

equ

irem

ent Reserve

Capacity/Interest

Reserve Interest/Capacity

Critiques of Water Footprint

Conceptual challenges Natural assimilative capacity of environment is not accounted for

Currently no policy on WF as a tool for water resources management

Methodological or technical considerations Problematic representations of water quality

Evapotranspiration: Gross vss Net

Sustainability & appropriate responses to WF is still emerging: Without a context, comparing WF is unhelpful

Simplifying WF to a risk weighting is also unhelpful

Difficult to access accurate data Linked to buy in from water managers in a company

Standardising the applications of WF definitions

Variation in water quality standards is a challenge for Grey WF

Recommendations

Methodology, Assessment and Data Get company involvement in the decision making

Standardise data usage

Employ expert practitioners

Always consider contextual issues

WF is both a metaphor and a metric

Institutional and Policy Implications Aim to encourage voluntary disclosure and transparency

Get agreement on industry-wide approach and application

Increase support for WF as a mainstream WRM tool