Virtual water trade (also known as trade in embedded or
embodied water) refers to the hidden flow of water if food or other
commodities are traded from one place to another. For instance, it takes
1,600 cubic meters of water on average to produce one metric tonne of
wheat. The precise volume can be more or less depending on climatic
conditions and agricultural practice. Hoekstra and Chapagain have
defined the virtual-water content of a product (a commodity, good or
service) as "the volume of freshwater used to produce the product,
measured at the place where the product was actually produced".
[1] It refers to the sum of the water use in the various steps of the production chain.
Professor
John Anthony Allan from
King's College London and the
School of Oriental and African Studies introduced the virtual water concept,
[2]
to support his argument that countries in the Middle East can save
their scarce water resources by relying more on import of food. For his
contributions he was awarded the 2008
Stockholm Water Prize.
[3]
Allan stated: "The water is said to be virtual because once the wheat
is grown, the real water used to grow it is no longer actually contained
in the wheat. The concept of virtual water helps us realize how much
water is needed to produce different goods and services. In semi-arid
and arid areas, knowing the virtual water value of a good or service can
be useful towards determining how best to use the scarce water
available."
There are, however, significant deficiencies with the concept of
virtual water that mean there is a significant risk in relying on these
measures to guide policy conclusions. Accordingly, Australia's National
Water Commission considers that the measurement of virtual water has
little practical value in decision making regarding the best allocation
of scarce water resources
Virtual water trade refers to the idea that when goods and
services are exchanged, so is virtual water. When a country imports one
tonne of wheat instead of producing it domestically, it domestically, it is saving about 1,300 cubic meters of
real indigenous water. If this country is water-scarce, the water that
is 'saved' can be used towards other ends. If the exporting country is
water-scarce, however, it has exported 1,300 cubic meters of virtual
water since the real water used to grow the wheat will no longer be
available for other purposes. This has obvious strategic implications
for countries that are water-constrained such as those found in the
Southern African Development Community (SADC) area
[4][5][6]
Water-scarce countries like Israel discourage the export of oranges
(relatively heavy water guzzlers) precisely to prevent large quantities
of water being exported to different parts of the world.
In recent years, the concept of virtual water trade has gained weight
both in the scientific as well as in the political debate. The notion
of the concept is ambiguous. It changes between an analytical,
descriptive concept and a political induced strategy. As an analytical
concept, virtual water trade represents an instrument which allows the
identification and assessment of policy options not only in the
scientific but also in the political discourse. As a politically induced
strategy the question is, whether virtual water trade can be
implemented in a sustainable way, whether the implementation can be
managed in a social, economical and ecological fashion, and for which
countries the concept offers a meaningful option.
The data that underlie the concept of virtual water can readily be
used to construct water satellite accounts, and brought into economic
models of international trade such as the
GTAP Computable General Equilibrium Model.
[7]
Such a model can be used to study the economic implications of changes
in water supply or water policy, as well as the water resource
implications of economic development and trade liberalisation.
In sum, virtual water trade allows a new, amplified perspective on
water problems: In the framework of recent developments from a
supply-oriented to a demand-oriented management of water resources it
opens up new fields of
governance
and facilitates a differentiation and balancing of different
perspectives, basic conditions and interests. Analytically the concept
enables one to distinguish between global, regional and local levels and
their linkages. This means, that water resource problems have to be
solved in
problemsheds[8][9]
if they cannot be successfully addressed in the local or regional
watershed. Virtual water trade can thus overcome the hydro-centricity of
a narrow watershed view. According to the proceedings of a 2006
conference in
Frankfurt, Germany, it seems reasonable to link the new concept with the approach of
Integrated Water Resources Management.
Limitations of the virtual water measure
Key shortcomings of virtual water measures are that the concept:
- Relies on an assumption that all sources of water, whether in the
form of rainfall or provided through an irrigation system, are of equal
value.[10]
- Implicitly assumes that water that would be released by reducing a
high water use activity would necessarily be available for use in a less
water-intensive activity. For example, the implicit assumption is that
water used in rangeland beef production would be available to be used to
produce an alternative, less water-intensive activity. As a practical
matter this may not be the case, nor might the alternatives be economic.[10]
- Fails as an indicator of environmental harm nor does it provide any
indication of whether water resources are being used within sustainable
extraction limits. The use of virtual water estimates therefore offer no
guidance for policy makers seeking to ensure that environmental
objectives are being met.[10]
The deficiencies with the concept of virtual water mean that there is
a significant risk in relying on these measures to guide policy
conclusions. Accordingly, Australia's National Water Commission
considers that the measurement of virtual water has little practical
value in decision making regarding the best allocation of scarce water
resources.
[11]
Other limitations more specific to the MENA (Middle East & North Africa) region include:
- In MENA rural societies, farmers are by tradition politically
influential and would prohibit new policies for water allocation.
Reallocating the water resources adds a huge burden on the farmers
especially when a large portion of those farmers use their land for
their own food consumption which happens to be their only source of food
supply.[12]
- Importing food could pose the risk of further political dependence.
The notion of "Self Sufficiency" has always been the pride of the MENA
region.[13]
- The use of virtual water lies in the religious regulations for
charging for water. According to Al-Bukhari, Prophet Mohammad’s
teachings, the Prophet said: “People are partners in three: Water,Herbs
and Fire” (referring to basic energy resources). Therefore, and because
farmers are generally poor and rain water, rivers and lakes are like a
gift from God,the MENA countries might find it difficult to charge the
farmers the full cost for water.[13]
The concept of virtual water trade was introduced to refer to the
idea that countries can save domestic water by importing food. Imported
food, however, comes from somewhere. In 2002, professor Arjen Y.
Hoekstra, at the time working for UNESCO-IHE, now at University of
Twente, the Netherlands, introduced the concept of
water footprint.
The water footprint shows the link between consumer goods or a
consumption pattern and water use and pollution. Virtual water trade and
water footprint can be seen as part of a bigger story: the
globalization of water.
Thanks to :
Wikipedia
