The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products
Open accessAbstract
Abstract. This study quantifies the green, blue and grey water footprint of global crop production in a spatially-explicit way for the period 1996–2005. The assessment improves upon earlier research by taking a high-resolution approach, estimating the water footprint of 126 crops at a 5 by 5 arc minute grid. We have used a grid-based dynamic water balance model to calculate crop water use over time, with a time step of one day. The model takes into account the daily soil water balance and climatic conditions for each grid cell. In addition, the water pollution associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizer in crop production is estimated for each grid cell. The crop evapotranspiration of additional 20 minor crops is calculated with the CROPWAT model. In addition, we have calculated the water footprint of more than two hundred derived crop products, including various flours, beverages, fibres and biofuels. We have used the water footprint assessment framework as in the guideline of the Water Footprint Network. Considering the water footprints of primary crops, we see that the global average water footprint per ton of crop increases from sugar crops (roughly 200 m3 ton−1), vegetables (300 m3 ton−1), roots and tubers (400 m3 ton−1), fruits (1000 m3 ton−1), cereals (1600 m3 ton−1), oil crops (2400 m3 ton−1) to pulses (4000 m3 ton−1). The water footprint varies, however, across different crops per crop category and per production region as well. Besides, if one considers the water footprint per kcal, the picture changes as well. When considered per ton of product, commodities with relatively large water footprints are: coffee, tea, cocoa, tobacco, spices, nuts, rubber and fibres. The analysis of water footprints of different biofuels shows that bio-ethanol has a lower water footprint (in m3 GJ−1) than biodiesel, which supports earlier analyses. The crop used matters significantly as well: the global average water footprint of bio-ethanol based on sugar beet amounts to 51 m3 GJ−1, while this is 121 m3 GJ−1 for maize. The global water footprint related to crop production in the period 1996–2005 was 7404 billion cubic meters per year (78 % green, 12 % blue, 10 % grey). A large total water footprint was calculated for wheat (1087 Gm3 yr−1), rice (992 Gm3 yr−1) and maize (770 Gm3 yr−1). Wheat and rice have the largest blue water footprints, together accounting for 45 % of the global blue water footprint. At country level, the total water footprint was largest for India (1047 Gm3 yr−1), China (967 Gm3 yr−1) and the USA (826 Gm3 yr−1). A relatively large total blue water footprint as a result of crop production is observed in the Indus river basin (117 Gm3 yr−1) and the Ganges river basin (108 Gm3 yr−1). The two basins together account for 25 % of the blue water footprint related to global crop production. Globally, rain-fed agriculture has a water footprint of 5173 Gm3 yr−1 (91 % green, 9 % grey); irrigated agriculture has a water footprint of 2230 Gm3 yr−1 (48 % green, 40 % blue, 12 % grey).
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
Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity
Vörösmarty, C. J., McIntyre, P. B., Gessner, M. O., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P., Glidden, S., Bunn, S. E., Sullivan, C. A., Liermann, C. R., et al. (2010) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature09440 · Cited by 7,582
Water footprints of nations: Water use by people as a function of their consumption pattern
Hoekstra, A. Y., & Chapagain, A. K. (2006) · Water Resources Management · doi:10.1007/s11269-006-9039-x · Cited by 1,458 · cited 2×
“Chapagain and Hoekstra (2004) and Hoekstra and Chapagain (2007, 2008) improved this study in a number of respects, but still did not explicitly distinguish between green and blue water consumption.”
BackgroundSiebert, 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
Four billion people facing severe water scarcity
Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2016) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500323 · Cited by 5,531
Self-citationKummu, M., de Moel, H., Porkka, M., Siebert, S., Varis, O., & Ward, P. J. (2012) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.08.092 · Cited by 1,300
Hajjari, M., Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., & Ghanavati, H. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.01.034 · Cited by 513
Water Footprint Assessment: Evolvement of a New Research Field
Hoekstra, A. Y. (2017) · Water Resources Management · doi:10.1007/s11269-017-1618-5 · Cited by 382
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y.
- Venue
- Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
- Publisher
- Copernicus GmbH
- Published
- 2011-05-25
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1577-1600
- ISSN
- 1027-5606 (ISSN-L)
- 1607-7938
- OpenAlex
- W2096829520
- Cited by
- 2,866
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 74.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5194/hess-15-1577-2011
- The paper
- Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2011). The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-15-1577-2011
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.