Although nutritionists have long been aware of the importance of clean drinking water and sanitation, water is becoming part of the international political agenda only after a slow realization of its scarcity. This is mainly because water has been taken for granted in industrialized countries except during periods of drought. in many areas of developing countries, water shortages already exist. Even with improved management, new sources of water will have to be developed at higher costs per project. Provision of clean water and sanitation has been rendered difficult by rapid urbanization since the middle of the twentieth century. Although cities have managed to provide a water supply, they have not been able to provide sewage and wastewater treatment. Meanwhile, irrigated agriculture uses nearly 70% of world water. in the future, food security will become even more dependent on irrigation. Poor management, due mostly to low salaries and political interference, is one of the main reasons for inefficient water systems. Underpricing of water in towns and on farms discourages conservation. Furthermore, people who do not have access to tap water in developing countries pay 10 times more than those who have taps.

Water, energy and food nexus of Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is presented in the light of water governance. The water governance doctrine refers to social, economic, administrative and political systems influencing the transboundary water use and management. Water governance means who gets what water, when and how much, and who has the right to water related benefits. Indus Water Treaty is cited to be one of the few successful settlements of boundary water basin conflicts that has stood the test of times since last six decades. Riparian states have opportunities of harvesting water, power and agriculture by compliance to accords in letter and spirit. IWT restrains both (India) and lower (Pakistan) riparian from pulling out of accord from fear of deadly consequences. IWT is founded on World Bank’s professionally prepared comprehensive terms and conditions keeping in mind future regional developments. This treaty has given control of three eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas and Sutlej) to India and three western rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab) to Pakistan. IWT gives both countries genuine share of eastern/western waters for domestic use, agriculture and electricity generation using Run-of-River Plants, subject to observing minimum level of water flow into lower riparian at Head Marala Barrage. Water, energy and food nexus of this treaty bonds upper and lower riparian to comply with water governance principles. Upper riparian diverted 34 million acre feet (MAF) water out of eastern rivers before entering into Pakistan and launched run-of-river power plants spree on western rivers in last two decades. Restricting water flow to lower riparian in the name of pond filling needs attention. Unrestricted use of water in run-of-river power plants is pointed out to be a limiting factor in Indus Water Treaty. Continuum of cooperation has room for collaboration under Indus Water Treaty. India and Pakistan can sort out disputes by dialogue, in light of rights and needs, rather Harmon Doctrine.

Food aid is a critical component of the global food system, particularly when emergency situations arise. For the first time, we evaluate the water footprint of food aid. To do this, we draw on food aid data from theWorld Food Programme and virtual water content estimates from WaterStat. We find that the total water footprint of food aid was 10 km3 in 2005, which represents approximately 0.5% of the water footprint of food trade and 2.0% of the water footprint of land grabbing (i.e., water appropriation associated with large agricultural land deals). The United States is by far the largest food aid donor and contributes 82% of the water footprint of food aid. The countries that receive the most water embodied in aid are Ethiopia, Sudan, North Korea, Bangladesh and Afghanistan. Notably, we find that there is significant overlap between countries that receive food aid and those that have their land grabbed. Multivariate regression results indicate that donor water footprints are driven by political and environmental variables, whereas recipient water footprints are driven by land grabbing and food indicators.

Concern is expressed about 2 recent decisions on protective additives to flour and drinking water in the British Isles. The first, a joint proposal by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, and the Department of Health, stated that the fortification and restoration of flour with certain minerals (iron and calcium) and vitamins (thiamin and nicotinic acid) would no longer be compulsory. The second was a recent court ruling in Scotland (also the topic of a pending test case in England) that it was beyond the power of a local authority to add fluorine to the water supply. The potential danger to human health in these 2 instances is discussed in light of recent findings. (wz)

Poorer countries often face a severe trade-off: the need to improve socio-economic conditions is hard to balance with the maintenance of key ecological processes. As a case study, we select Colombia, a Latin American country with almost 10% of its inhabitants living in extreme poverty. We elaborate a water–food–labour (WFL) nexus grounded on a sub-national Environmentally Extended Input–Output (EEIO) analysis to assess the virtual water trade (VWT) and virtual informal labour (VIL) flows across administrative departments and economic sectors related to domestic trade. The main results are the following: high cross-departmental resource interdependence both in terms of VWT and VIL, rich departments highly depend on the resources of their neighbouring trading partners, extreme poverty conditions shown by economically isolated departments, and considerable income inequality in the food production sectors. Moreover, departments that are net exporters of virtual water suffer from water stress that might be exacerbated by future high rainfall variability due to climate change. These results suggest that strategies to attain sustainable development goals (SDGs) must deal with the biophysical constraints and the economic and political feasibility of the proposed solutions. In this vein, we argue that a holistic framework, grounded on quantitative analyses, is necessary to support informed policy decisions for the simultaneous achievement of multiple (possibly contrasting) goals. Moreover, severe spatial imbalances call for local policy responses coordinated at the national level.

The current study introduces a conceptual socio-hydrological-based framework for the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus. The proposed conceptual framework aims to investigate how farmers' dynamic agricultural activities under different socio-economic conditions affect the WEF systems. The WEF nexus model has been integrated with an Agent-Based Model, reflecting the farmers’ agricultural activities. Furthermore, the agent-based model benefits from Association Rule Mining to define farmer agents’ agricultural decision-making in various conditions. The processes within the WEF nexus are simultaneously physical, socio-economic, ecological, and political. Indeed, there are interrelated interactions among the mentioned processes in ways that have not yet been properly delineated and mapped. Thus, to obtain sustainable outcomes, the current study investigates trade-offs among natural resources and social systems in the WEF nexus approach. The proposed socio-hydrological WEF nexus framework may provide more in-depth future insights for policy-makers through capturing bidirectional feedbacks among farmers and WEF systems. In other words, the proposed framework can help policymakers to capture the dynamic impacts of agricultural activities by farmers on the WEF nexus, which may vary due to different socio-economic conditions.

We thank the authors, Varis and Keskinen, and Nauditt, for their constructive contributions. We endorse their key comments, further referring to recent literature and events, including the UN 2018 High Level Political Forum on sustainable development. Here, we elaborate on the epistemological perspective of the water–energy–food nexus conceptualization, assessment, discourse and operationalization.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the political economy of food-water security in the water-scarce Middle East and North Africa region. The study deploys the lens of virtual water trade to determine how the region's economies have met their rising food-water requirements over the past three decades. It is shown that the region's water and food security currently depend to a considerable extent on water from outside the region, ‘embedded’ in food imports and accessed through trade. The analysis includes blue (surface and groundwater) and green water resources.

Sustainable food systems are high on the political and research agendas. One of the three pillars of sustainability is environmental sustainability. We argue that, when defining related policies, such as policies under the European Green Deal, both environmental pressures and impacts carry important and complementary information and should be used in combination. Although the environmental focus of a sustainable food system is to have a positive or neutral impact on the natural environment, addressing pressures is necessary to achieve this goal. We show this by means of the pressure water use (or water footprint) and its related impact water stress, by means of different arguments: 1) Water use and water stress are only weakly correlated; 2) water use can be evaluated towards a benchmark, addressing resource efficiency; 3) water use is used for resource allocation assessments within or between economic sectors; 4) water amounts are needed to set fair share amounts for citizens, regions, countries or on a global level 5) the pressure water use requires less data, whereas water stress assessments have more uncertainty and 6) both provide strong communication tools to citizens, including for food packaging labelling. As a result, we present a water quantity sustainability scheme, that addresses both water use and water stress, and can be used in support of food system policies, including food package labelling.

Policymaking in the water–energy–food nexus is characterized by complex ecological, social, and economic interdependencies. Nexus research assumes these interactions to be overseen in the respective resource governance resulting in sectoral perspectives contributing to unsustainable outcomes. In Germany, the political priority given to the formation of an internationally competitive livestock sector by means of intensification, specialization and regional concentration has exerted sustained pressure on water and soil resources. The expansion of bioenergy plants promoted by the renewable energy act has exacerbated the situation. Despite the persistency of the ecological challenges, German policymakers only reacted when the European Commission referred Germany to the European Court of Justice. Current policy efforts to tackle the ecological problems are now provoking disruptions in the agrarian sector in regions with high nitrate concentrations in water resources. By combining the social-ecological systems framework with hypotheses derived from nexus research, we explore the interactions between food, water and energy systems and aim at understanding the unsustainable outcomes. We argue that the non-consideration of the complex interdependencies between the agricultural, the water and the energy system in policymaking and the divergence of policy goals constitute a major cause of unsustainable governance.