The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Environmental Impacts of Water Use in Global Crop Production: Hotspots and Trade-Offs with Land Use
Open accessAbstract
Global crop production is causing pressure on water and land resources in many places. In addition to local resource management, the related environmental impacts of commodities traded along international supply chains need to be considered and managed accordingly. For this purpose, we calculate the specific water consumption and land use for the production of 160 crops and crop groups, covering most harvested mass on global cropland. We quantify indicators for land and water scarcity with high geospatial resolution. This facilitates spatially explicit crop-specific resource management and regionalized life cycle assessment of processed products. The vast cultivation of irrigated wheat, rice, cotton, maize, and sugar cane, which are major sources of food, bioenergy, and fiber, drives worldwide water scarcity. According to globally averaged production, substituting biofuel for crude oil would have a lower impact on water resources than substituting cotton for polyester. For some crops, water scarcity impacts are inversely related to land resource stress, illustrating that water consumption is often at odds with land use. On global average, maize performs better than rice and wheat in the combined land/water assessment. High spatial variability of water and land use related impacts underlines the importance of appropriate site selection for agricultural activities.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices
Tilman, D., Cassman, K. G., Matson, P. A., Naylor, R., & Polasky, S. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01014 · Cited by 7,957
Global hydrological cycles and world water resources
Oki, T., & Kanae, S. (2006) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1128845 · Cited by 4,392
Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt
Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., & Hawthorne, P. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1152747 · Cited by 3,902
Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000
Ramankutty, N., Evan, A. T., Monfreda, C., & Foley, J. A. (2008) · Global Biogeochemical Cycles · doi:10.1029/2007gb002952 · Cited by 1,942
Siebert, S., & Döll, P. (2010) · Journal of Hydrology · doi:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2009.07.031 · Cited by 874
Cited by
Reducing food's environmental impacts through producers and consumers
Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaq0216 · Cited by 6,085
Stadler, K., Wood, R., Bulavskaya, T., Södersten, C., Simas, M., Schmidt, S., Usubiaga, A., Acosta‐Fernández, J., Kuenen, J., Bruckner, M., et al. (2018) · Journal of Industrial Ecology · doi:10.1111/jiec.12715 · Cited by 1,024
Meat alternatives: life cycle assessment of most known meat substitutes
Smetana, S., Mathys, A., Knoch, A., & Heinz, V. (2015) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-015-0931-6 · Cited by 566
Land use impacts on biodiversity in LCA: a global approach
de Baan, L., Alkemade, R., & Koellner, T. (2013) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0412-0 · Cited by 373
Global land-water nexus: Agricultural land and freshwater use embodied in worldwide supply chains
Chen, B., Han, M. Y., Peng, K., Zhou, S. L., Shao, L., Wu, X. F., Wei, W. D., Liu, S. Y., Li, Z., Li, J. S., et al. (2018) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.09.138 · Cited by 357
Review of methods addressing freshwater use in life cycle inventory and impact assessment
Kounina, A., Margni, M., Bayart, J.-B., Boulay, A.-M., Berger, M., Bulle, C., Frischknecht, R., Koehler, A., Milà i Canals, L., Motoshita, M., et al. (2013) · The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/s11367-012-0519-3 · Cited by 334
Self-citationReynolds, T. W., Waddington, S. R., Anderson, C. L., Chew, A., True, Z., & Cullen, A. (2015) · Food Security · doi:10.1007/s12571-015-0478-1 · Cited by 280
Stoessel, F., Juraske, R., Pfister, S., & Hellweg, S. (2012) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es2030577 · Cited by 269
Self-citationDetailed global modelling of soil organic carbon in cropland, grassland and forest soils
Morais, T. G., Teixeira, R. F. M., & Domingos, T. (2019) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0222604 · Cited by 114
Hoekman, S. K., Broch, A., & Liu, X. (. (2018) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.050 · Cited by 83
Water footprinting in life cycle assessment: how to count the drops and assess the impacts?
Berger, M., Pfister, S., & Motoshita, M. (2016) · LCA Compendium – The Complete World of Life Cycle Assessment · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-7610-3_3 · Cited by 10
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Pfister, S., Bayer, P., Koehler, A., & Hellweg, S.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2011-06-06
- Volume
- 45
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 5761-5768
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2163045437
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 15.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
