International audience

We thank Arnbjerg-Nielsen and co-authors for their constructive contribution. We endorse their key comments and suggestions on how to increase awareness of and action on water quality interactions in the water–energy–food (WEF) nexus. Here, we advance the discussion, commenting on the scope of water quality to embrace ecosystem as well as human needs, and the importance of transdisciplinarity and focusing at the city/aquifer/drainage basin scale in WEF nexus hotspots in ensuring that water quality is considered in WEF nexus approaches. We also identify how recent global events, the COVID-19 pandemic and the 26th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC COP 26), may intensify the WEF nexus and its water quality interlinkages, highlighting the need to weave WEF considerations into addressing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and the climate and biodiversity emergencies.

Data availability: Data will be made available on request. | Supplementary materials are available online at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135422007916?via%3Dihub#sec0017 . | Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). The Multi-Sectoral Water Circularity Assessment (MSWCA) is a methodological framework developed for circularity assessment of the Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems nexus. It involves five methodological steps and includes an indicators list for the selection of case-specific indicators. This study expands the MSWCA to provide a systematic approach for selecting indicators, considering system's circular actions and multi-functionality, the capture of implemented changes, the three CE principles and the sustainable development goals. Furthermore, this study differentiates between benchmark and dynamic circularity assessment and applies the expanded MSWCA in a water system of the HYDROUSA H2020 project. The benchmark assessment indicates that the HYDROUSA system achieves a 75% increase of water circularity, 76–80% increase of nutrients circularity and 14% reduction of operational `carbon footprint compared to the baseline scenario. The dynamic assessment highlights that additional measures can improve the system's circularity performance (e.g. water circularity can reach 94%) and mitigate risks occurring from uncontrollable changes. | This research was supported by the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program HYDROUSA (Grant Agreement No 776643).

The Multi-Sectoral Water Circularity Assessment (MSWCA) is a methodological framework developed for circularity assessment of the Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems nexus. It involves five methodological steps and includes an indicators list for the selection of case-specific indicators. This study expands the MSWCA to provide a systematic approach for selecting indicators, considering system's circular actions and multi-functionality, the capture of implemented changes, the three CE principles and the sustainable development goals. Furthermore, this study differentiates between benchmark and dynamic circularity assessment and applies the expanded MSWCA in a water system of the HYDROUSA H2020 project. The benchmark assessment indicates that the HYDROUSA system achieves a 75% increase of water circularity, 76–80% increase of nutrients circularity and 14% reduction of operational `carbon footprint compared to the baseline scenario. The dynamic assessment highlights that additional measures can improve the system's circularity performance (e.g. water circularity can reach 94%) and mitigate risks occurring from uncontrollable changes.

Green and blue infrastructure (GBI) is an innovative strategy to tackle food-water-energy (FWE) nexus issues. GBI can provide the benefits of food production, energy saving and generation, waterlogging control, rainwater cleansing and harvesting. Significant efforts have been devoted to measuring the implications of GBI on FWE nexus. However, there is little research to simulate the multiple linkages between GBI and FWE nexus in urban areas, and the lack of a unified methodology framework also easily leads to an understanding bias of their connections and makes it challenging to compare the results. Focusing on the prior published literature, this study clarifies the interactions between GBI and FWE nexus and reviews the methods to quantify the implications of GBI on FWE nexus in cities, including FWE-related benefits, life cycle environmental impacts, and avoided upstream environmental footprints induced by FWE-related benefits. It is revealed that most studies focus on the FWE-related benefits or (and) life cycle environmental impacts of GBI from a silo perspective. Researchers pay little attention to the avoided trans-boundary environmental footprints by GBI, and carbon footprint is the greatest concern in the existing research. There is little evidence on comprehensive quantifications regarding multiple impacts of GBI on FWE nexus at the urban scale. The review outlines methods to simulate the linkages between GBI and FWE nexus and calls for a holistic methodological framework to apply at the urban scale. Such assessment practices would make sense for FWE-oriented resilience planning and governance for urban GBI implementation.

The interactive dynamics in the food, water, and energy system as a nexus (FWEN) are critical to the sustainable development of global cities, and they can be mediated by green and blue infrastructure (GBI) in the urban area. Here we provide a comprehensive literature review to examine how GBI affects FWEN in urban centers, an area which is currently understudied. In order to do this, we undertake a systematic review of the literature using a meta-analytic approach and topic modelling. Based on our synthesis, we develop a conceptual framework of the key links between urban GBI and FWEN and the direction and magnitude of the relationship. We found that GBIs can benefit food supply, energy saving, and climate change mitigation but at a price of food safety and water contamination. Well-designed urban construction can help curb the negative effects. Therefore, we need to make deliberate and integrative policy to link GBI with each element in urban FWEN. Moreover, the focus of studies on GBIFWEN links is also heterogeneous across cities: urban agriculture and food security are priorities in cities located in Africa and Asia as well as in lower income and larger cities (but not metropolitan areas), while the cooling effect of green space has been a focus for cities of middle or high income. Finally, current research focuses on isolated analysis, lacking integrated studies needed for decision making supporting tools. While isolated analyses lead to connectivity failures and can result in adverse impacts, integrated analyses can identify interdependencies of environmental resources between parts of a cycle and across different scales, which can increase resource efficiency and minimize environmental degradation. Therefore, our key findings point out the importance of linking the effects of GBI on each component of FWEN in both research and policy making.

Forest ecosystem services are critical for maintaining ecological balance and supporting human well-being from different perspectives. However, rapid land use changes driven by agricultural expansion, urbanization, and industrial activities have significantly altered forest ecosystems, degrading the services they provide. We here conduct an ecosystem service assessment through biophysical and economic estimates for a multipurpose Andean water sub-basin in western Colombia. We compare a business as usual (BAU) with a forest nature-based solution (NbS) scenario focused on forest landscape restoration. The research employed participatory methods for the NbS selection and economic valuation techniques to evaluate water flow regulation, water provisioning, water purification, and food provisioning services. Results show that the NbS scenario yielded a net positive economic impact across most evaluated ecosystem services, with notable trade-offs. Specifically, the NbS scenario increased water retention by 2.9% compared to BAU. Water flow regulation demonstrated the most substantial economic benefit, increasing by EUR 11.39 million/year in the NbS scenario. On the other hand, the food provisioning service presented a reduction of EUR 3.2 million/year in the NbS scenario. These findings highlight the potential of forest-based NbS to address the Water–Energy–Food–Ecosystem (WEFE) nexus challenges. The study’s outcomes provide valuable insights for policymakers and practitioners, supporting the development of Payment for Ecosystem Services schemes and integrating ecosystem service valuation into land use planning and decision-making processes.