Article | Published:

Global assessment of water challenges under uncertainty in water scarcity projections

Nature Sustainabilityvolume 1pages486494 (2018) | Download Citation

Abstract

Water scarcity, a critical environmental issue worldwide, has primarily been driven by a significant increase in water extractions during the last century. In the coming decades, climate and societal changes are projected to further exacerbate water scarcity in many regions worldwide. Today, a major issue for the ongoing policy debate is to identify interventions able to address water scarcity challenges in the presence of large uncertainties. Here, we take a probabilistic approach to assess global water scarcity projections following feasible combinations of shared socioeconomic pathways and representative concentration pathways for the first half of the twenty-first century. We identify—alongside trends in median water scarcity—changes in the uncertainty range of anticipated water scarcity conditions. Our results show that median water scarcity and the associated range of uncertainty are generally increasing worldwide, including many major river basins. On the basis of these results, we develop a general decision-making framework to enhance policymaking by identifying four representative clusters of specific water policy challenges and needs.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Data availability

The WFaS data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. 1.

    United Nations Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations General Assembly, New York, NY, 2015).

  2. 2.

    Vanham, D. et al. Physical water scarcity metrics for monitoring progress towards SDG target 6.4: an evaluation of indicator 6.4.2 ‘Level of water stress’. Sci. Total Environ. 613–614, 218–232 (2018).

  3. 3.

    Wada, Y., Beek, L. P. Hv, Wanders, N. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Human water consumption intensifies hydrological drought worldwide. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 034036 (2013).

  4. 4.

    Wada, Y., van Beek, L. P. H. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Modelling global water stress of the recent past: on the relative importance of trends in water demand and climate variability. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 3785–3808 (2011).

  5. 5.

    Schewe, J. et al. Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3245–3250 (2014).

  6. 6.

    Greve, P. & Seneviratne, S. I. Assessment of future changes in water availability and aridity. Geophys. Res. Lett. 42, 5493–5499 (2015).

  7. 7.

    Huang, J., Yu, H., Dai, A., Wei, Y. & Kang, L. Drylands face potential threat under 2 C global warming target. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 417–422 (2017).

  8. 8.

    Gudmundsson, L., Seneviratne, S. I. & Zhang, X. Anthropogenic climate change detected in European renewable freshwater resources. Nat. Clim. Chang. 7, 813–816 (2017).

  9. 9.

    Qureshi, M. E. & Whitten, S. M. Regional impact of climate variability and adaptation options in the southern Murray-Darling Basin, Australia. Water Resour. Econ. 5, 67–84 (2014).

  10. 10.

    Flörke, M., Schneider, C. & McDonald, R. I. Water competition between cities and agriculture driven by climate change and urban growth. Nat. Sustain. 1, 51–58 (2018).

  11. 11.

    Hanasaki, N. et al. A global water scarcity assessment under Shared Socio-economic Pathways – Part 1: Water use. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 2375–2391 (2013).

  12. 12.

    Hanasaki, N. et al. A global water scarcity assessment under Shared Socio-economic Pathways – Part 2: Water availability and scarcity. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 17, 2393–2413 (2013).

  13. 13.

    Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. Four billion people facing severe water scarcity. Sci. Adv. 2, e1500323 (2016).

  14. 14.

    Wada, Y. et al. Modeling global water use for the 21st century: the Water Futures and Solutions (WFaS) initiative and its approaches. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 175–222 (2016).

  15. 15.

    Hoekstra, A. Y. Water scarcity challenges to business. Nat. Clim. Change 4, 318–320 (2014).

  16. 16.

    Wada, Y., Gleeson, T. & Esnault, L. Wedge approach to water stress. Nat. Geosci. 7, 615–617 (2014).

  17. 17.

    Kahil, M. T., Dinar, A. & Albiac, J. Modeling water scarcity and droughts for policy adaptation to climate change in arid and semiarid regions. J. Hydrol. 522, 95–109 (2015).

  18. 18.

    Tortajada, C. Water management in Singapore. Int. J. Water Resour. D 22, 227–240 (2006).

  19. 19.

    Devineni, N., Perveen, S. & Lall, U. Assessing chronic and climate-induced water risk through spatially distributed cumulative deficit measures: a new picture of water sustainability in India. Water Resour. Res. 49, 2135–2145 (2013).

  20. 20.

    Winemiller, K. O. et al. Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. Science 351, 128–129 (2016).

  21. 21.

    Läderach, P. et al. Climate Change adaptation of coffee production in space and time. Climatic Change 141, 47–62 (2017).

  22. 22.

    Hadarits, M. et al. The interplay between incremental, transitional, and transformational adaptation: a case study of Canadian agriculture. Reg. Environ. Change 17, 1515–1525 (2017).

  23. 23.

    Moss, R. H. et al. The next generation of scenarios for climate change research and assessment. Nature 463, 747–756 (2010).

  24. 24.

    O'Neill, B. C. et al. A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared socioeconomic pathways. Climatic Change 122, 387–400 (2014).

  25. 25.

    Dalin, C., Wada, Y., Kastner, T. & Puma, M. J. Groundwater depletion embedded in international food trade. Nature 543, 700–704 (2017).

  26. 26.

    Pastor, A. V., Ludwig, F., Biemans, H., Hoff, H. & Kabat, P. Accounting for environmental flow requirements in global water assessments. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 5041–5059 (2014).

  27. 27.

    Taylor, K., Stouffer, R. & Meehl, G. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2012).

  28. 28.

    Perveen, S. & James, L. A. Multiscale effects on spatial variability metrics in global water resources data. Water Resour. Manage. 24, 1903–1924 (2010).

  29. 29.

    Perveen, S. & James, L. A. Scale invariance of water stress and scarcity indicators: facilitating cross-scale comparisons of water resources vulnerability. Appl. Geogr. 31, 321–328 (2011).

  30. 30.

    Raskin, P. & Gleick, P. H. Water Futures: Assessment of Long-range Patterns and Problems. Comprehensive Assessment of the Freshwater Resources of the World (Stockholm Environment Institute, Stockholm, 1997).

  31. 31.

    Alcamo, J. et al. Global estimates of water withdrawals and availability under current and future ‘businessas-usual’ conditions. Hydrol. Sci. J. 48, 339–348 (2003).

  32. 32.

    Liu, J. et al. Water scarcity assessments in the past, present, and future. Earths Future 5, 545–559 (2017).

  33. 33.

    Hawkins, E. & Sutton, R. The potential to narrow uncertainty in regional climate predictions. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 90, 1095–1107 (2009).

  34. 34.

    Hoekstra, A. Y., Mekonnen, M. M., Chapagain, A. K., Mathews, R. E. & Richter, B. D. Global monthly water scarcity: blue water footprints versus blue water availability. PLoS ONE 7, e32688 (2012).

  35. 35.

    Veldkamp, T. I. E. et al. Changing mechanism of global water scarcity events: Impacts of socioeconomic changes and inter-annual hydro-climatic variability. Global Environ. Change 32, 18–29 (2015).

  36. 36.

    Kates, R. W.., Travis, W. R. & Wilbanks, T. J. Transformational adaptation when incremental adaptations to climate change are insufficient. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 7156–7161 (2012).

  37. 37.

    Hall, J. W. et al. Coping with the curse of freshwater variability. Science 346, 429–430 (2014).

  38. 38.

    Kahil, M. T., Connor, J. D. & Albiac, J. Efficient water management policies for irrigation adaptation to climate change in Southern Europe. Ecol. Econ. 120, 226–233 (2015).

  39. 39.

    Leclère, D., Jayet, P.-A. & de Noblet-Ducoudré, N. Farm-level autonomous adaptation of European agricultural supply to climate change. Ecol. Econ. 87, 1–14 (2013).

  40. 40.

    Dittrich, R., Wreford, A. & Moran, D. A survey of decision-making approaches for climate change adaptation: are robust methods the way forward? Ecol. Econ. 122, 79–89 (2016).

  41. 41.

    IPCC Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report (eds Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R. K. & Meyer, L. A.) (IPCC, 2015).

  42. 42.

    Park, S. E. et al. Informing adaptation responses to climate change through theories of transformation. Global Environ. Change 22, 115–126 (2012).

  43. 43.

    Wheeler, S., Zuo, A. & Bjornlund, H. Farmers’ Climate Change beliefs and adaptation strategies for a water scarce future in Australia. Global Environ. Change 23, 537–547 (2013).

  44. 44.

    Water, Growth and Finance—Policy Perspectives (OECD, Paris, 2016).

  45. 45.

    Grafton, R. Q., Libecap, G., McGlennon, S., Landry, C. & O'Brien, B. An integrated assessment of water markets: a cross-country comparison. Rev. Environ. Econ. Policy 5, 219–239 (2011).

  46. 46.

    Connor, J. D. & Kaczan, D. in Drought in Arid and Semi-Arid Regions (eds Schwabe, K., Albiac, J., Connor, J. D., Hassan, R. M. & González, L. M.) 357–374 (Springer, Dordrecht, 2013).

  47. 47.

    Qureshi, M. E., Schwabe, K., Connor, J. & Kirby, M. Environmental water incentive policy and return flows. Water Resour. Res. 46, W04517 (2010).

  48. 48.

    El-Sadek, A. Virtual water trade as a solution for water scarcity in Egypt. Water Resour. Manage. 24, 2437–2448 (2010).

  49. 49.

    Porkka, M., Guillaume, J. H. A., Siebert, S., Schaphoff, S. & Kummu, M. The use of food imports to overcome local limits to growth. Earths Future 5, 393–407 (2017).

  50. 50.

    Grafton, R. Q. et al. Global insights into water resources, climate change and governance. Nat. Clim. Change 3, 315–321 (2013).

  51. 51.

    van Beek, L. P. H., Wada, Y. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Global monthly water stress: 1. Water balance and water availability. Water Resour. Res. 47, W07517 (2011).

  52. 52.

    Wada, Y., Wisser, D. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Global modeling of withdrawal, allocation and consumptive use of surface water and groundwater resources. Earth Syst. Dyn. 5, 15–40 (2014).

  53. 53.

    Hanasaki, N. et al. An integrated model for the assessment of global water resources – Part 1: Model description and input meteorological forcing. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 12, 1007–1025 (2008).

  54. 54.

    Flörke, M. et al. Domestic and industrial water uses of the past 60 years as a mirror of socio-economic development: a global simulation study. Global Environ. Change 23, 144–156 (2013).

  55. 55.

    Müller Schmied, H. et al. Sensitivity of simulated global-scale freshwater fluxes and storages to input data, hydrological model structure, human water use and calibration. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 3511–3538 (2014).

  56. 56.

    Warszawski, L. et al. The inter-sectoral impact model intercomparison project (ISI-MIP): project framework. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 3228–3232 (2014).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the Global Environment Facility (GEF) for funding the development of this research as a part of the ‘Integrated Solutions for Water, Energy, and Land (ISWEL)’ project (GEF Contract Agreement: 6993), and the support of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization. The Water Futures and Solutions Initiative (WFaS) was launched by the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, UNESCO/UN-Water, the World Water Council, the International Water Association and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport of the Republic of Korea, and has been supported by the government of Norway, the Asian Development Bank and the Austrian Development Agency. More than 35 organizations contribute to the scientific project team, and an additional 25 organizations are represented in stakeholder groups. Furthermore, WFaS relies on numerous databases compiled and made available by many more organizations, which are referred to in this paper. The research described in this paper would not have been possible without the collaboration of all of these organizations in the WFaS Project Team. The WFaS data are available upon request.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria

    • P. Greve
    • , T. Kahil
    • , J. Mochizuki
    • , T. Schinko
    • , Y. Satoh
    • , P. Burek
    • , G. Fischer
    • , S. Tramberend
    • , R. Burtscher
    • , S. Langan
    •  & Y. Wada

Authors

  1. Search for P. Greve in:

  2. Search for T. Kahil in:

  3. Search for J. Mochizuki in:

  4. Search for T. Schinko in:

  5. Search for Y. Satoh in:

  6. Search for P. Burek in:

  7. Search for G. Fischer in:

  8. Search for S. Tramberend in:

  9. Search for R. Burtscher in:

  10. Search for S. Langan in:

  11. Search for Y. Wada in:

Contributions

P.G., T.K. and Y.W. designed the study and the associated analysis. P.G. performed all computations. Y.S. preprocessed the data. Y.W., T.K., Y.S., P.B., S.T., G.F., R.B. and S.L. designed the water scenarios. P.G., T.K., J.M., T.S. and Y.W. wrote the manuscript. All authors commented on the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Greve.

Supplementary information

  1. Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Figures 1-5

About this article

Publication history

Received

Accepted

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0134-9