Agriculture accounts for 80% of global freshwater consumption but the environmental impacts of water use are highly localized and depend on water scarcity. The water use impacts of food production should be a key consideration of sustainable diets, yet little is known of the water scarcity demands of diets, especially of individuals. Here we estimate the water scarcity footprint (WSF)—a water use impact metric that accounts for regional scarcity—of individual diets in the United States (n = 16,800) and find a fivefold variation between the highest and lowest quintile of diets ranked by WSF. Larger intakes of some meat, fruit, nuts and vegetables drive these differences. Meat consumption is the greatest contributor (31%) to the WSF of the average diet, and within that, beef contributes about six times that of chicken. Variation between substitutable foods provides insight into diet shifts that can reduce WSF. We introduce a novel, geospatially explicit approach that combines the types and quantities of foods in the diets of individuals, the irrigation water required to produce those foods and the relative scarcity of water where that irrigation occurs.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Open Access articles citing this article.
Less animal protein and more whole grain in US school lunches could greatly reduce environmental impacts
Communications Earth & Environment Open Access 23 June 2022
Subscribe to Nature+
Get immediate online access to the entire Nature family of 50+ journals
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $9.92 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
The water consumption and crop production data that support the findings of this study are available in Mendeley Data: https://doi.org/10.17632/brn4xm47jk.3. The NHANES dietary data that support the findings of this study are available from the National Center for Health Statistics, US Centers for Disease Control and Management: https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/. All other data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Willett, W. et al. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT–Lancet commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 393, 447–492 (2019).
Tilman, D. & Clark, M. Global diets link environmental sustainability and human health. Nature 515, 518–522 (2014).
Hallstrom, E., Carlsson-Kanyama, A. & Borjesson, P. Environmental impact of dietary change: a systematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 91, 1–11 (2015).
Kim, B. F. et al. Country-specific dietary shifts to mitigate climate and water crises. Global Environ. Change 62, 101926 (2019).
Azevedo, L. B., Henderson, A. D., van Zelm, R., Jolliet, O. & Huijbregts, M. A. J. Assessing the importance of spatial variability versus model choices in life cycle impact assessment: the case of freshwater eutrophication in europe. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 13565–13570 (2013).
Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (United Nations General Assembly, 2015).
Foley, J. A. et al. Solutions for a cultivated planet. Nature 478, 337–342 (2011).
Dieter, C. A. et al. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2015. Report No 1441 (US Geological Survey, 2018).
Whitmee, S. et al. Safeguarding human health in the Anthropocene epoch: report of the Rockefeller Foundation–Lancet commission on planetary health. Lancet 386, 1973–2028 (2015).
Gerten, D. et al. Feeding ten billion people is possible within four terrestrial planetary boundaries. Nat. Sustain. 3, 200–208 (2020).
Boulay, A.-M. et al. The WULCA consensus characterization model for water scarcity footprints: assessing impacts of water consumption based on available water remaining (AWARE). Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23, 368–378 (2018).
Boulay, A.-M. et al. Consensus building on the development of a stress-based indicator for LCA-based impact assessment of water consumption: outcome of the expert workshops. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 20, 577–583 (2015).
Tom, M. S., Fischbeck, P. S. & Hendrickson, C. T. Energy use, blue water footprint, and greenhouse gas emissions for current food consumption patterns and dietary recommendations in the US. Environ. Syst. Decis. 36, 92–103 (2016).
Blackstone, N. T., El-Abbadi, N. H., McCabe, M. S., Griffin, T. S. & Nelson, M. E. Linking sustainability to the healthy eating patterns of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans: a modelling study. Lancet Planet. Health 2, e344–e352 (2018).
Birney, C. I., Franklin, K. F., Davidson, F. T. & Webber, M. E. An assessment of individual foodprints attributed to diets and food waste in the United States. Environ. Res. Lett. 12, 105008 (2017).
Gephart, J. A. et al. The environmental cost of subsistence: optimizing diets to minimize footprints. Sci. Total Environ. 553, 120–127 (2016).
Mekonnen, M. M. & Fulton, J. The effect of diet changes and food loss reduction in reducing the water footprint of an average American. Water Int. 43, 860–870 (2018).
Blas, A., Garrido, A. & Willaarts, B. A. Evaluating the water footprint of the Mediterranean and American diets. Water 8, 448 (2016).
Rehkamp, S. & Canning, P. Measuring embodied blue water in American diets: an EIO supply chain approach. Ecol. Econ. 147, 179–188 (2018).
Harris, F. et al. The water footprint of diets: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv. Nutr. 11, 375–386 (2019).
Vanham, D., Comero, S., Gawlik, B. M. & Bidoglio, G. The water footprint of different diets within European sub-national geographical entities. Nat. Sustain. 1, 518 (2018).
Vanham, D., Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. The water footprint of the EU for different diets. Ecol. Indicators 32, 1–8 (2013).
Environmental Management—Water Footprint—Principles, Requirements and Guidelines ISO 14046:2014 (International Organization for Standardization, 2014).
Ridoutt, B. G., Hendrie, G. A. & Noakes, M. Dietary strategies to reduce environmental impact: a critical review of the evidence base. Adv. Nutr. 8, 933–946 (2017).
Quinteiro, P., Ridoutt, B. G., Arroja, L. & Dias, A. C. Identification of methodological challenges remaining in the assessment of a water scarcity footprint: a review. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 23, 164–180 (2018).
Heller, M. C., Willits-Smith, A., Meyer, R., Keoleian, G. A. & Rose, D. Greenhouse gas emissions and energy use associated with production of individual self-selected US diets. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 044004 (2018).
2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (US Department of Health and Human Services & US Department of Agriculture, 2015).
Willits-Smith, A., Aranda, R., Heller, M. C. & Rose, D. Addressing the carbon footprint, healthfulness, and costs of self-selected diets in the USA: a population-based cross-sectional study. Lancet Planet. Health 4, e98–e106 (2020).
Hess, T., Andersson, U., Mena, C. & Williams, A. The impact of healthier dietary scenarios on the global blue water scarcity footprint of food consumption in the UK. Food Policy 50, 1–10 (2015).
Goldstein, B., Hansen, S. F., Gjerris, M., Laurent, A. & Birkved, M. Ethical aspects of life cycle assessments of diets. Food Policy 59, 139–151 (2016).
Hess, T., Chatterton, J., Daccache, A. & Williams, A. The impact of changing food choices on the blue water scarcity footprint and greenhouse gas emissions of the British diet: the example of potato, pasta and rice. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 4558–4568 (2016).
Notarnicola, B., Tassielli, G., Renzulli, P. A., Castellani, V. & Sala, S. Environmental impacts of food consumption in Europe. J. Clean. Prod. 140, 753–765 (2017).
Heller, M. C. et al. Environmental analyses to inform transitions to sustainable diets in developing countries: case studies for Vietnam and Kenya. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 25, 1183–1196 (2020).
Ridoutt, B. G., Baird, D., Anastasiou, K. & Hendrie, G. A. Diet quality and water scarcity: evidence from a large Australian population health survey. Nutrients 11, 1846 (2019).
Kim, B. F. et al. Country-specific dietary shifts to mitigate climate and water crises. Global Environ. Change 62, 101926 (2020).
Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products. Ecosystems 15, 401–415 (2012).
Meier, T. & Christen, O. Environmental impacts of dietary recommendations and dietary styles: Germany as an example. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47, 877–888 (2013).
Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 1577–1600 (2011).
Zhuo, L., Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. Sensitivity and uncertainty in crop water footprint accounting: a case study for the Yellow River basin. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 2219–2234 (2014).
World Economic Forum Water Initiative Water Security: The Water–Food–Energy–Climate Nexus (Island Press, 2011).
Bazilian, M. et al. Considering the energy, water and food nexus: towards an integrated modelling approach. Energy Policy 39, 7896–7906 (2011).
Hoekstra, A. Y., Chapagain, A. K., Aldaya, M. M. & Mekonnen, M. M. The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard (Earthscan, 2011).
Jefferies, D. et al. Water footprint and life cycle assessment as approaches to assess potential impacts of products on water consumption. Key learning points from pilot studies on tea and margarine. J. Clean. Prod. 33, 155–166 (2012).
Lovarelli, D., Bacenetti, J. & Fiala, M. Water footprint of crop productions: a review. Sci. Total Environ. 548–549, 236–251 (2016).
Chenoweth, J., Hadjikakou, M. & Zoumides, C. Quantifying the human impact on water resources: a critical review of the water footprint concept. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 18, 2325–2342 (2014).
Ridoutt, B. G. & Pfister, S. A revised approach to water footprinting to make transparent the impacts of consumption and production on global freshwater scarcity. Global Environ. Change 20, 113–120 (2010).
Ridoutt, B. G. & Huang, J. Environmental relevance—the key to understanding water footprints. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, E1424–E1424 (2012).
Pfister, S. et al. Understanding the LCA and ISO water footprint: a response to Hoekstra (2016) ‘A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA’. Ecol. Indic. 72, 352–359 (2017).
2018 Irrigation and Water Management Survey (USDA, 2019).
Pfister, S. & Bayer, P. Monthly water stress: spatially and temporally explicit consumptive water footprint of global crop production. J. Clean. Prod. 73, 52–62 (2014).
Pfister, S. & Bayer, P. Water Consumption of Crop on Watershed Level (Blue and Green Water, Uncertainty, incl. Shapefile) https://doi.org/10.17632/brn4xm47jk.1 (2017).
Ramankutty, N., Evan, A. T., Monfreda, C. & Foley, J. A. Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB1003 (2008).
Monfreda, C., Ramankutty, N. & Foley, J. A. Farming the planet: 2. Geographic distribution of crop areas, yields, physiological types, and net primary production in the year 2000. Global Biogeochem. Cycles 22, GB1022 (2008).
Mekonnen, M. M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Crops and Derived Crop Products (UNESCO-IHE, 2010).
Hoekstra, A. Y. A critique on the water-scarcity weighted water footprint in LCA. Ecol. Indic. 66, 564–573 (2016).
Hoekstra, A. Y. Water footprint assessment: evolvement of a new research field. Water Resour. Manage. 31, 3061–3081 (2017).
Caldeira, C. et al. Water footprint profile of crop-based vegetable oils and waste cooking oil: comparing two water scarcity footprint methods. J. Cleaner Prod. 195, 1190–1202 (2018).
Boulay, A.-M., Benini, L. & Sala, S. Marginal and non-marginal approaches in characterization: how context and scale affect the selection of an adequate characterization model. The AWARE model example. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 25, 2380–2392 (2020).
Forin, S., Berger, M. & Finkbeiner, M. Comment to ‘Marginal and non-marginal approaches in characterization: how context and scale affect the selection of an adequate characterization factor. The AWARE model example’. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 25, 663–666 (2020).
Boulay, A.-M. & Lenoir, L. Sub-national regionalisation of the AWARE indicator for water scarcity footprint calculations. Ecol. Indic. 111, 106017 (2020).
Rotz, C. A., Asem-Hiablie, S., Place, S. & Thoma, G. Environmental footprints of beef cattle production in the United States. Agric. Syst. 169, 1–13 (2019).
Peters, C. J., Picardy, J. A., Darrouzet-Nardi, A. & Griffin, T. S. Feed conversions, ration compositions, and land use efficiencies of major livestock products in US agricultural systems. Agric. Syst. 130, 35–43 (2014).
Peters, C. J. et al. Carrying capacity of US agricultural land: ten diet scenarios. Elementa 4, 000116 (2016).
Census of Agriculture Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey (USDA NASS, 2013).
Aquaculture Trade Tables (USDA Economic Research Service, 2018).
Pahlow, M., Van Oel, P., Mekonnen, M. & Hoekstra, A. Y. Increasing pressure on freshwater resources due to terrestrial feed ingredients for aquaculture production. Sci. Total Environ. 536, 847–857 (2015).
Rose, D., Heller, M. C., Willits-Smith, A. M. & Meyer, R. J. Carbon footprint of self-selected US diets: nutritional, demographic, and behavioral correlates. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 108, 1–9 (2019).
NHANES: 2005–2006 Data Documentation, Codebook and Frequencies (National Center for Health Statistics and Centers for Disease Control, 2008).
We thank G. Lewis for his assistance in generating the maps in Fig. 1, and R. Meyer for laying the groundwork for this study through his master’s thesis at the University of Michigan. This work is funded by the Wellcome Trust, grant number 106854/Z/15/Z.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review information Nature Food thanks Tim Hess and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
About this article
Cite this article
Heller, M.C., Willits-Smith, A., Mahon, T. et al. Individual US diets show wide variation in water scarcity footprints. Nat Food 2, 255–263 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00256-2
Less animal protein and more whole grain in US school lunches could greatly reduce environmental impacts
Communications Earth & Environment (2022)
Nature Food (2021)
Environmental Science and Pollution Research (2021)