Sector-based resource management approaches partly contribute to the insecurities in water, energy and food sectors and resources. These approaches fail to acknowledge and capture the interlinkages between these connected resources, a key strength in the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus approach. However, the multi-centric, multidimensional, and spatiotemporally dynamic WEF nexus is complex and uncertain, thus requiring dedicated tools that can unpack it. Various sources have blamed the slow uptake and practical implementation of the WEF nexus on the unavailability of appropriate tools and models. To confirm those claims with evidence, literature on WEF nexus tools was searched from Scopus and Web of Science and systematically reviewed using the PRISMA protocol. It was found that the WEF nexus tools are being developed increasingly, with a current cumulative number of at least 46 tools and models. However, their majority (61%) is unreachable to the intended users. Some available tools are in code format, which can undermine their applicability by users without programming skills. A good majority (70%) lack key capabilities such as geospatial features and transferability in spatial scale and geographic scope. Only 30% of the tools are applicable at local scales. In contrast, some tools are restricted in geographic scope and scale of application, for example, ANEMI 3 and WEF models for large and household scales, respectively. Most (61%) of the tools lack wide application in actual case studies; this was partly attributed to the tools not being readily available. Thus, efforts should be made to disseminate and ensure end-users’ uptake and application of developed tools. Alternatively, the user-friendly tools should be developed on-demand as requested and inspired by potential clients. Developers should consider utility, transferability and scalability across uses and users when improving existing tools and developing new tools so that they are adaptable, only requiring new, specific location-adapted inputs and data. Where and when it is necessary to capture spatial dynamics of the WEF nexus, tools should be geographic information system (GIS)-enabled for automatic WEF nexus location selection, geospatial mapping, and visualization. Such GIS-enabled WEF nexus tools can provide a bird’s eye view of hotspots and champions of WEF nexus practices.

In today’s intrinsically connected world, the Water–Food–Energy–Climate Nexus (WFEC Nexus) concept provides a starting point for informed and transparent decision-making based on the trade-offs and synergies between different sectors, including aquatic ecosystems, food security, energy production, and climate neutrality. The WFEC Nexus approach is particularly applicable in regions requiring transboundary water management, such as Central Asia. Unfortunately, this region with unevenly distributed water resources—consisting of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan—is characterized by data scarcity, which limits informed decision-making. However, open-source geodata is becoming increasingly available. This paper aims to fill Central Asia’s WFEC Nexus data gap by providing an overview of key data. We collected geodata through an integrated survey of stakeholders and researchers, stakeholder consultation, and literature screening. Sixty unique datasets were identified, belonging to one of six thematic categories: (1) climate, (2) hydrology, (3) geography and topography, (4) geomorphology, (5) ecology, and (6) anthropogenic uses. For each dataset, a succinct description, including a link to the online source, is provided. We also provide possible applications of using the presented datasets, demonstrating how they can assist in conducting various studies linked to the WFEC Nexus in Central Asia and worldwide.

Life cycle assessment is a multidisciplinary framework usually deployed to appraise the sustainability of various product or service supply-chains. Over recent decades, its use in the agri-food sector has risen sharply, and alongside this, a wide range of methodological advances have been generated. Spatial-life cycle assessment, defined in the current document as the interpretation of life cycle assessment results within a geographical nature, has not gone unexplored entirely, yet its rise as a sub-method of life cycle assessment has been rather slow relative to other avenues of research (e.g., including the nutritional sciences within life cycle assessment). With this relative methodological stagnation as a motivating factor, our paper combines a process-based model, the Catchment Systems Model, with various life cycle impact assessments (ReCiPe, Centre for Environmental Studies and Environmental Product Declaration) to propose a simple, yet effective, approach for visualising the technically feasible efficacy of various on-farm intervention strategies. As water quality was the primary focus of this study, interventions reducing acidification and eutrophication potentials of both arable and livestock farm types in the Southeast of England were considered. The study site is an area with a marked range of agricultural practices in terms of intensity. All impacts to acidification potential and eutrophication potential are reported using a functional unit of 1 ha. Percentage changes relative to baseline farm types, i.e., those without any interventions, arising from various mitigation strategies, are mapped using geographical information systems. This approach demonstrates visually how a spatially-orientated life cycle assessment could provide regional-specific information for farmers and policymakers to guide the restoration of certain waterbodies. A combination of multiple mitigation strategies was found to generate the greatest reductions in pollutant losses to water, but in terms of individual interventions, optimising farm-based machinery (acidification potential) and fertiliser application strategies (eutrophication potential) were found to have notable benefits.