Increasing agricultural productivity has always been a prominent feature on the regional agenda due to a high incidence of food and nutrition insecurity. This review assessed the current status of irrigated agriculture in southern Africa from a water–energy–food (WEF) nexus perspective. Gaps and opportunities for improving irrigated agriculture within the context of the WEF nexus were also assessed in terms of the feasible limits to which they can be exploited. Southern Africa faces water scarcity, and climate projections show that member states will face increased physical and/or economic water scarcity by as early as 2025, which will have negative impacts on water, energy and food production. Recurrent droughts experienced across the region reaffirm the sensitive issues of food and energy insecurity as well as water scarcity. Projections of an increasing population within the region indicate increased water, energy and food demand. With agriculture already accounting for about 70% of water withdrawals, increasing the area under irrigation will place additional demand on already strained energy grids and scarce water resources. This poses the question—is increasing irrigated agriculture a solution to improving water access, food security and energy supply? While there are prospects for increasing the area under irrigation and subsequent improvement in agricultural productivity, adopting a WEF nexus approach in doing so would mitigate trade-offs and unintended consequences. Consideration of the WEF nexus in integrated resources planning and management eliminates the possibilities of transferring problems from one sector to other, as it manages synergies and trade-offs. While it is acknowledged that improving water productivity in irrigated agriculture could reduce water and energy use while increasing yield output, there is a need to decide how such savings would then be reallocated. Any intervention to increase the irrigated area should be done in the context of a WEF nexus analytical framework to guide policy and decision-making. Technical planning should evolve around the WEF nexus approach in setting targets, as WEF nexus indicators would reveal the performance and impact of proposed interventions on any of the three WEF nexus components.

Increasing agricultural productivity has always been a prominent feature on the regional agenda due to a high incidence of food and nutrition insecurity. This review assessed the current status of irrigated agriculture in southern Africa from a water–energy–food (WEF) nexus perspective. Gaps and opportunities for improving irrigated agriculture within the context of the WEF nexus were also assessed in terms of the feasible limits to which they can be exploited. Southern Africa faces water scarcity, and climate projections show that member states will face increased physical and/or economic water scarcity by as early as 2025, which will have negative impacts on water, energy and food production. Recurrent droughts experienced across the region reaffirm the sensitive issues of food and energy insecurity as well as water scarcity. Projections of an increasing population within the region indicate increased water, energy and food demand. With agriculture already accounting for about 70% of water withdrawals, increasing the area under irrigation will place additional demand on already strained energy grids and scarce water resources. This poses the question—is increasing irrigated agriculture a solution to improving water access, food security and energy supply? While there are prospects for increasing the area under irrigation and subsequent improvement in agricultural productivity, adopting a WEF nexus approach in doing so would mitigate trade-offs and unintended consequences. Consideration of the WEF nexus in integrated resources planning and management eliminates the possibilities of transferring problems from one sector to other, as it manages synergies and trade-offs. While it is acknowledged that improving water productivity in irrigated agriculture could reduce water and energy use while increasing yield output, there is a need to decide how such savings would then be reallocated. Any intervention to increase the irrigated area should be done in the context of a WEF nexus analytical framework to guide policy and decision-making. Technical planning should evolve around the WEF nexus approach in setting targets, as WEF nexus indicators would reveal the performance and impact of proposed interventions on any of the three WEF nexus components.

Increasing agricultural productivity has always been a prominent feature on the regional agenda due to a high incidence of food and nutrition insecurity. This review assessed the current status of irrigated agriculture in southern Africa from a water–energy–food (WEF) nexus perspective. Gaps and opportunities for improving irrigated agriculture within the context of the WEF nexus were also assessed in terms of the feasible limits to which they can be exploited. Southern Africa faces water scarcity, and climate projections show that member states will face increased physical and/or economic water scarcity by as early as 2025, which will have negative impacts on water, energy and food production. Recurrent droughts experienced across the region reaffirm the sensitive issues of food and energy insecurity as well as water scarcity. Projections of an increasing population within the region indicate increased water, energy and food demand. With agriculture already accounting for about 70% of water withdrawals, increasing the area under irrigation will place additional demand on already strained energy grids and scarce water resources. This poses the question—is increasing irrigated agriculture a solution to improving water access, food security and energy supply? While there are prospects for increasing the area under irrigation and subsequent improvement in agricultural productivity, adopting a WEF nexus approach in doing so would mitigate trade-offs and unintended consequences. Consideration of the WEF nexus in integrated resources planning and management eliminates the possibilities of transferring problems from one sector to other, as it manages synergies and trade-offs. While it is acknowledged that improving water productivity in irrigated agriculture could reduce water and energy use while increasing yield output, there is a need to decide how such savings would then be reallocated. Any intervention to increase the irrigated area should be done in the context of a WEF nexus analytical framework to guide policy and decision-making. Technical planning should evolve around the WEF nexus approach in setting targets, as WEF nexus indicators would reveal the performance and impact of proposed interventions on any of the three WEF nexus components.

Realism about productivity gains in agriculture and water is critical to understand if the world can feed itself while protecting nature. We use government-reported data to review progress over 2000–2020 compared to projections for irrigated and rainfed agriculture and trade. Our results over the period 2000–2020 show that productivity gains largely did not materialize. Instead of consolidating cereal production and trade in favourable regions like North America, Europe and Russia, their arable land declined by 35 million hectares, while arable land expanded by 74 million hectares in Africa, Latin America and Eastern Asia. Likewise, water productivity gains did not materialize, as photosynthesis breakthroughs did not occur. Land productivity (yield) gains were projected to rise 21–61 %, making the observed increase in cereal yields of 31 % a slight one. This puts the world on the path of using steadily more land and water to produce food and feed, at the expense of nature. Solutions to veer off this path include reducing food demand (including dietary change), stabilising rainfed agriculture and broadening the crop genetic resources base.

Realism about productivity gains in agriculture and water is critical to understand if the world can feed itself while protecting nature. We use government-reported data to review progress over 2000–2020 compared to projections for irrigated and rainfed agriculture and trade. Our results over the period 2000–2020 show that productivity gains largely did not materialize. Instead of consolidating cereal production and trade in favourable regions like North America, Europe and Russia, their arable land declined by 35 million hectares, while arable land expanded by 74 million hectares in Africa, Latin America and Eastern Asia. Likewise, water productivity gains did not materialize, as photosynthesis breakthroughs did not occur. Land productivity (yield) gains were projected to rise 21–61 %, making the observed increase in cereal yields of 31 % a slight one. This puts the world on the path of using steadily more land and water to produce food and feed, at the expense of nature. Solutions to veer off this path include reducing food demand (including dietary change), stabilising rainfed agriculture and broadening the crop genetic resources base.

Realism about productivity gains in agriculture and water is critical to understand if the world can feed itself while protecting nature. We use government-reported data to review progress over 2000–2020 compared to projections for irrigated and rainfed agriculture and trade. Our results over the period 2000–2020 show that productivity gains largely did not materialize. Instead of consolidating cereal production and trade in favourable regions like North America, Europe and Russia, their arable land declined by 35 million hectares, while arable land expanded by 74 million hectares in Africa, Latin America and Eastern Asia. Likewise, water productivity gains did not materialize, as photosynthesis breakthroughs did not occur. Land productivity (yield) gains were projected to rise 21–61 %, making the observed increase in cereal yields of 31 % a slight one. This puts the world on the path of using steadily more land and water to produce food and feed, at the expense of nature. Solutions to veer off this path include reducing food demand (including dietary change), stabilising rainfed agriculture and broadening the crop genetic resources base.

Freshwater scarcity is recognized as a major environmental concern at the center of international debates. To tackle this issue, the concept of water footprint as a measure to address the potential impacts of water use emerged, attracting the interest of businesses worldwide. Currently, two references exist to assess the water footprint of a product, process, or organization: the water footprint network and ISO 14046. The objective of this paper is to verify whether the application of these two methodologies to the same case study gives consistent results: 1) in the evaluation of different alternatives in terms of identification of water-related hotspots (consumptive and degradative use) and 2) in the identification of the alternative that presents better performance related to water.The two methodologies were applied to a tomato sauce produced in the US that was undergoing a redesign process that involved different packaging alternatives. The results of the study confirmed that the two methodologies provide consistent results in terms of hotspot analysis and decisions among alternatives with reference to consumptive water use; however, the results related to degradative use are not always consistent. Considering this finding, it is important for companies to undertake a comprehensive assessment before making decisions and to understand the reasoning behind the methods and the objective of the indicators used in the assessments.