Virtual Water Consumption and its Relationship to Future Food Security in Singapore

Virtual Water Consumption and its Relationship to Future Food Security in Singapore Lim Zhong Yi A0103547L Supervisor: A/P Yeh Jen-Feng Pat 11 th MAY 2015

Outline 1. Background 2. Objectives of study 3. Work flow 4. Definition and concept 5. Methodology 6. Virtual water content of crops & livestock 7. Singapore s virtual water import flows 8. Global distribution of freshwater resources 9. Freshwater resources vulnerability 10. Water poverty index 11. Study implications and limitations 12. Recommendations and conclusions 2

1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2030 2050 Share (%) Background 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 70 30 Historical food consumption patterns Period 1965 1975 2002 2011 Food items ton/yr Share (%) ton/yr Share (%) Cereals 708,016 69.52 499,087 29.88 Roots 40,404 3.97 107,302 6.42 Vegetables 90,793 8.92 401,712 24.05 Fruits 149,016 14.63 309,541 18.53 Livestock 30,164 2.96 352,432 21.10 Total 1,018,392 100.00 1,670,074 100.00 24 15 19 21 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 Year Values ('000) 1960 1,646.4 1970 2,074.5 1980 2,413.9 1990 3,047.1 2000 4,027.9 2010 5,076.7 2011 5,183.7 2012 5,312.4 2013 5,399.2 2014 5,490.0 2020 6,057.0 2030 6,578.0 2040 6,904.0 2050 7,065.0 Singapore s annual population ('000) 10 4 6 9 3 1,000 0 Cereals Roots Vegetables Fruits Livestock 0 1965-1975 2002-2011 Data source: FAO (2015) Data source: Singapore Department of Statistics, FAO (2015) Year 3

Background Food Items ton/yr % Share Cereals 499,087 29.88% Wheat 166,104 9.95% Rice 303,314 18.16% Cereal unmilled 7,292 0.44% Barley 396 0.02% Maize 19,914 1.19% Oats 222 0.01% Oats rolled 1,845 0.11% Vegetables 401,712 24.05% Livestock 352,432 21.10% Beef Cattle 19,583 1.17% Goat 19,979 1.20% Sheep 9,299 0.56% Chicken 172,450 10.33% Duck 12,455 0.75% Pork 59,953 3.59% Hen eggs 58,713 3.52% Rice 18.16% Fruits 18.53% Chicken 10.33% Wheat 9.95% Annual Food Import Quantity per Product (2002 2011) Vegetables 24.05% Other 12.55% Roots and tubers 6.42% Pork 3.59% Eggs 3.52% Goat 1.20% Maize 1.19% Beef cattle 1.17% Duck 0.75% Sheep 0.56% Cereal unmilled 0.44% Oats rolled 0.11% Barley 0.02% Oats 0.01% Fruits 309,541 18.53% Roots and tubers 107,302 6.42% Total 1,670,074 100.00% Data source: FAO (2015) 4

Background Annual Food Import Quantity Per Country (2002 2011) ton/yr 600,000 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 No. Countries ton/yr Share (%) Cum. % 1. Malaysia 484,397 29.00 29.00 2. Thailand 266,482 15.96 44.96 3. China 196,686 11.78 56.74 4. Australia 164,135 9.83 66.57 5. USA 136,291 8.16 74.73 6. Brazil 98,022 5.87 80.60 Others 324,060 19.40 100.00 Total 1,670,074 100.00 100,000 0 Malaysia Thailand China Australia USA Brazil Viet Nam India Indonesia Canada Data source: FAO (2015) Cereals Roots Fruits Livestock Vegetables 5

Objectives of study 1. To estimate the annual virtual water import volumes in Singapore during the period; 2. To identify the food producing countries & agricultural commodities responsible for the largest annual virtual water volumes imported; 3. To evaluate the degree of water resources vulnerability (water stress and scarcity) of selected food producing countries using various indices and identify the risks of future food security in Singapore. 6

Work Flow Estimated virtual water content of food producing countries Annual quantity of food imported in Singapore Gross annual virtual water import flows in Singapore Degree of water resources vulnerability in food-producing countries Implications on future food security in Singapore 7

Definition & Concept 1. Concepts of Virtual Water and Water Footprint Virtual water refers to the water volume embodied in a product (Allan,1998). Water footprint has a broader scope and refers not only to the volume of water, but also to the types of water (green, grey or blue) used, and when and where the water was used. i. Crop Evapotranspiration Et c ET 0 reference crop evapotranspiration K c crop coefficient 2. Calculation of Specific Water Demand ii. Reference crop evapotranspiration ET o iii. Virtual Water Content (VWC) 8

Definition & Concept 1. Concepts of Virtual Water and Water Footprint ii. Reference crop evapotranspiration ET o Virtual water refers to the water volume embodied in a product (Allan,1998). Water footprint has a broader scope and refers not only to the volume of water, but also to the types of water (green, grey or blue) used, and when and where the water was used. 2. Calculation of Specific Water Demand In which: 9

Definition & Concept 3. Basic components of food security Food Availability Production Distribution Exchange Food Access Affordability Allocation Preference Food Utilization Nutrition Safety Social Value Food security policy Food selfsufficiency Food import dependency Singapore s primary strategy to ensure that there is a continuous supply of safe food is to diversify our food sources. 10

Methodology 1. The methodology in this study consist of literature review and statistical data analysis. 2. Agricultural products selected in the study Cereals Vegetables Fruits Roots and tubers Livestock Wheat Rice (husked, milled, broken) Cereals Maize Oats Maize Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) Cabbages and other brassicas Asparagus Lettuce and chicory Spinach Tomatoes Cauliflowers and broccoli Cucumbers and gherkins Eggplants (aubergines) Chillies and peppers, green Onions, dry Garlic Beans, green Peas, green Carrots and turnips Vegetables, fresh Watermelons Melons, other (inc.cantaloupes) Bananas Oranges Tangerines, mandarins etc. Lemons and limes Grapefruit (inc. pomelos) Apples Pears Apricots Cherries Peaches and nectarines Plums and sloes Strawberries Grapes Figs dried Mangoes, mangosteens, guavas Avocados Pineapples Dates Kiwi fruit Papayas Fruit, tropical fresh Potatoes Sweet potatoes Starch, cassava Roots and tubers Meat, beef Meat, mutton Meat, pork Poultry meat Hen eggs 11

Methodology 3. Calculating Virtual Water Import Flows i. Virtual water trade of agricultural products The Virtual Water Trade [VWT] of a commodity [c] is given by the multiplication of the quantity of Commodity Traded [CT] and Virtual Water Content [VWC] of the commodity from country origin. ii. Gross Virtual Water Import (GVWI) The Gross Virtual Water Import [GVWI] is the sum of all virtual water of commodity [c] imported in year [t]. 12

Methodology 4. Falkenmark Water Stress Index Falkenmark et al. (1989) describes water stress as annual water availability per person. Thresholds of Falkenmark Index: Original Falkenmark indicator for water crowding Persons per flow unit a /yr a One flow unit = one million cubic metre Adapted water scarcity index or Falkenmark indicator m 3 /capita/yr Water stress implication < 600 > 1700 No Stress 600-1000 1000-1700 Stress 1000-2000 500-1000 Scarcity > 2000 < 500 Absolute Scarcity 13

Methodology 5. Water Scarcity Index The index of national Water Scarcity [WS] is the Water Use [WU] as percentage of the total Water Available [WA] of a country. The severity of water stress can be characterised as follow: Percent withdrawal Technical water stress <10 Low water stress 10 20 Medium low water stress 20 40 Medium high water stress >40 High water stress Data source: UN/WMO/SEI 1997 14

Methodology 6. Water Poverty Index Water Poverty Index measures the relative position of a country in providing water (Lawrence et al. 2002). The purpose of the index is to express an interdisciplinary measures which links household welfare with water availability and indicates the degree to which water scarcity impacts on human populations. This is possible by taking into account both physical and socio economic factors associated with water scarcity. WPI consists of 5 indices (resources, access, capacity, use and environment). Each indices consists of a few sub-indices which are normalised to a range of scales between 0 and 1 using the formula below unless otherwise mentioned. The sub-indices within each index are averaged and multiplied by 20. The final index score for WPI is the sum of all five indices in the range of 0 to 100. x i denotes the original value of country i, x max is the country with the highest value and x min is the country with lowest value. 15

Methodology 6. Water Poverty Index Structure of index and data used No. Components Data used 1 Resources Sum of internal and external renewable freshwater resources per capita (m 3 /cap/yr) expressed on log scale. An arbitrary factor of 0.5 is applied on external renewable freshwater resources to reduce weight as these resources are generally less secured compared to internal water resources. 2 Access Access to improved water sources (%) Access to improved sanitation facilities (%) Percentage of arable land equipped for irrigation (%) 3 Capacity GDP per capita, PPP (US$) Mortality rate, under 5 (per 1,000 live births) UNDP Education index Gini index 16

Methodology 6. Water Poverty Index No. Components Data used 4 Use Domestic freshwater withdrawals per capita (litres daily per capita consumption) < 50 litres daily per capita consumption : Index = x i /50 Between 50 150 litres daily per capita consumption: Index = 1 [( x min 50)/(x max 50)] > 150 litres daily per capita consumption: Index = 1 [( x min 50)/(x max 150)] Industrial & Agricultural water use efficiency is calculated as: The higher the ratio, the higher the water use efficiency by the sectors. 5 Environment Fertilizer consumption (kg/ha of arable land) Agricultural methane emissions (% of total) 17

Methodology 7. Data sources used in this study Data Period Data source Population in Singapore 1960 2011 Singapore Department of Statistics Virtual Water Import Flows Trade data for primary crops and livestock 2002 2011 FAOSTAT, AVA. Per capita consumption of main food items in Singapore 2002 2011 FAOSTAT, AVA. Virtual water content of agricultural products Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) Physical, socio-economic and environmental data 2013 FAOSTAT, UNDP, World Bank. 18

m 3 /ton Virtual water content of crops & livestock Global average virtual water footprint of agricultural products i. Crop Evapotranspiration Et c 18,000 16,000 14,000 15,712 ET 0 reference crop evapotranspiration K c crop coefficient 12,000 10,000 8,000 ii. Reference crop evapotranspiration ET o 6,000 5,225 4,000 2,000 2,872 2,231 1,827 1,788 1,673 1,423 1,222 iii. Virtual Water Content (VWC) 0 Beef Pork Hen egg Poultry Wheat Oats Paddy rice Barley Maize Green Blue Grey Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) 19

Virtual water content of crops & livestock ton/ha 10 8 6 4 8.72 Crop yield of paddy rice in various countries 7.70 6.38 5.02 4.73 3.50 3.18 2.94 i. Crop Evapotranspiration Et c ET 0 reference crop evapotranspiration K c crop coefficient 2 0 Australia USA China Viet Nam Indonesia Malaysia India Thailand ii. Reference crop evapotranspiration ET o Data source: FAO (2015) m 3 /ton 4000 3000 2000 1000 Average virtual water footprint of paddy rice 3104 2070 2286 1852 1403 1455 1010 1391 iii. Virtual Water Content (VWC) 0 Australia USA China Viet Nam Indonesia Malaysia India Thailand Green Blue Grey Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) 20

Virtual water content of crops & livestock ton/ha 10 8 6 4 2 8.72 Crop yield of paddy rice in various countries 7.70 6.38 5.02 4.73 3.50 3.18 2.94 ii. In which: Reference crop evapotranspiration ET o 0 Australia USA China Viet Nam Indonesia Malaysia India Thailand Data source: FAO (2015) m 3 /ton 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Average virtual water footprint of paddy rice 3104 2070 2286 1852 1403 1455 1010 1391 Australia USA China Viet Nam Indonesia Malaysia India Thailand Green Blue Grey Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) 21

m 3 /ton Virtual water content of crops & livestock Global average virtual water content of live animals per farming system Farming systems Unit Beef cattle Swine Sheep Poultry Grazing system m 3 /ton 21,829 8,724 16,311 7299 Mixed system m 3 /ton 15,712 6,226 8,335 3880 Industrial system m 3 /ton 10,244 5,225 5,623 2231 25,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 Grazing, mixed and industrial production systems supply about 9%, 54% and 37% of world meat production respectively. Mixed cattle systems are the dominant systems for example in Brazil, China, Ethiopia, India, New Zealand and the United States. For cattle, industrial systems are the dominant farming system in for example Japan and western European countries. 5,000 0 Beef cattle Swine Sheep Poultry For swine and poultry meat, industrial systems have become the main system for most parts of the world. Grazing system Mixed system Industrial system Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2010) 22

Singapore s virtual water import flows Comparison of results with earlier study (D. Vanham, 2011) Items D. Vanham, 2011 (1997 2001) Present study (2002 2011) 10 6 m 3 /yr 10 6 m 3 /yr Rice 614 895 Wheat 214 343 Net Virtual Water Import Crop products 2,386 1,946 Livestock products 1,461 1,527 Industrial products 7,934 - Total (exclude industrial products) 3,847 3,473 23

Singapore s virtual water import flows Food Items Mm 3 /yr Share (%) Livestock 1,527.19 43.98 Chicken 480.87 13.85 Pork 402.61 11.59 Beef, cattle 326.77 9.41 Hen eggs 167.52 4.82 Sheep 61.48 1.77 Goat 53.35 1.54 Duck 34.59 1.00 Cereals 1,293.54 37.25 Rice 894.58 25.76 Wheat 342.56 9.86 Maize 31.32 0.90 Cereal unmilled 19.77 0.57 Oats rolled 4.59 0.13 Oats 0.45 0.01 Barley 0.27 0.01 Fruits 393.15 11.32 Vegetables 150.50 4.33 Roots and tubers 108.42 3.12 Total 3,472.80 100.00 Virtual water import flows per product Swine 11.59% Chicken 13.85% Wheat 9.86% Beef cattle 9.41% Hen eggs 4.82% Fruits 11.32% Rice 25.76% Vegetables 4.33% Other 9.05% Roots and tubers 3.12% Sheep 1.77% Goat 1.54% Duck 1.00% Maize 0.90% Cereal unmilled 0.57% Oats rolled 0.13% Oats 0.01% Barley 0.01% 24

Singapore s virtual water import flows Virtual water import flows per year 1,000 900 800 700 10 6 m 3 /yr 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Thailand Malaysia Brazil Australia USA 25

Singapore s virtual water import flows 10 6 m 3 /yr 900 800 700 600 500 400 Virtual water import flows per country No. Countries Mm 3 /yr % Share Cum. % 1 Thailand 778 22.40 22.40 2 Malaysia 691 19.89 42.28 3 Brazil 586 16.88 59.16 4 Australia 412 11.86 71.02 5 USA 217 6.24 77.26 6 India 168 4.83 82.09 Others 622 17.91 100.00 Total 3,473 100.00 300 200 100 0 Thailand Malaysia Brazil Australia USA India China Viet Nam Indonesia New Zealand Cereals Roots Fruits Livestock Vegetables 26

Global distribution of freshwater resources Global freshwater withdrawals Industry, 17.70% Global freshwater resources distribution India 3% Peru 4% Indonesia 5% Colombia 5% Domestic, 11.57% Others 40% China 6% USA 7% Agriculture, 70.73% Canada 7% Brazil 13% Russia 10% Data source: World Bank, 2013 data. 27

m3 /cap/yr Freshwater resources vulnerability 90,000 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Falkenmark Water Stress Index More abundant Less abundant Data source: World Bank, 2013 data. Ranking Country Total renewable water resources per capita m 3 /cap/yr Condition 1 Singapore 111 Absolute Scarcity 2 South Africa 973 Scarcity 3 Denmark 1,068 Stress 4 Pakistan 1,355 Stress 5 India 1,526 Stress 6 China 2,005 No stress 7 France 3,282 No stress 8 Philippines 4,868 No stress 9 Netherlands 5,430 No stress 10 Thailand 6,545 No stress 11 Indonesia 8,080 No stress 12 USA 9,589 No stress 13 Viet Nam 9,643 No stress 14 Malaysia 19,517 No stress 15 Australia 21,077 No stress 16 Argentina 21,141 No stress 17 Myanmar 21,931 No stress 18 Brazil 43,157 No stress 19 Uruguay 50,543 No stress 20 New Zealand 72,570 No stress 21 Canada 82,485 No stress 28

Freshwater resources vulnerability Logarithmic diagram showing water demand and water availability of various food-producing countries Data source: World Bank, 2013 data. Ranking Country Criticality Technical water stress Ratio 1 Pakistan 0.74 High water stress 2 India 0.40 Medium high water stress 3 Singapore 0.32 Medium high water stress 4 South Africa 0.24 Medium high water stress 5 China 0.20 Medium low water stress 6 Philippines 0.17 Medium low water stress 7 USA 0.16 Medium low water stress 8 France 0.15 Medium low water stress 9 Thailand 0.13 Medium low water stress 10 Netherlands 0.12 Medium low water stress 11 Denmark 0.11 Medium low water stress 12 Viet Nam 0.09 Low water stress 13 Indonesia 0.06 Low water stress 14 Argentina 0.04 Low water stress 15 Australia 0.04 Low water stress 16 Myanmar 0.03 Low water stress 17 Uruguay 0.02 Low water stress 18 Malaysia 0.02 Low water stress 19 New Zealand 0.01 Low water stress 20 Brazil 0.01 Low water stress 21 Canada - - 29

m 3 /cap/yr 5,000 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 Freshwater resources vulnerability Virtual water flows related to trade in agricultural products per capita 0 GVWI GVWE Data source: Mekonnen and Hoekstra (2011) Period: 1996 2005. Ranking Country Criticality Technical water stress Ratio 1 Pakistan 0.74 High water stress 2 India 0.40 Medium high water stress 3 Singapore 0.32 Medium high water stress 4 South Africa 0.24 Medium high water stress 5 China 0.20 Medium low water stress 6 Philippines 0.17 Medium low water stress 7 USA 0.16 Medium low water stress 8 France 0.15 Medium low water stress 9 Thailand 0.13 Medium low water stress 10 Netherlands 0.12 Medium low water stress 11 Denmark 0.11 Medium low water stress 12 Viet Nam 0.09 Low water stress 13 Indonesia 0.06 Low water stress 14 Argentina 0.04 Low water stress 15 Australia 0.04 Low water stress 16 Myanmar 0.03 Low water stress 17 Uruguay 0.02 Low water stress 18 Malaysia 0.02 Low water stress 19 New Zealand 0.01 Low water stress 20 Brazil 0.01 Low water stress 21 Canada - - 30

Freshwater resources vulnerability Water Poverty Index Netherlands Canada New Zealand Australia France Malaysia United States Uruguay Thailand Denmark Argentina Vietnam Brazil Singapore Myanmar China Indonesia Philippines Pakistan South Africa India 70.06 67.60 64.66 63.89 60.83 60.78 60.10 59.73 58.08 57.95 56.91 56.18 54.96 53.94 52.92 51.75 49.97 48.33 47.09 45.25 43.61 5 most water sustainable countries virtual water import flows 5 least water sustainable countries virtual water import flows Livestock 44% Livestock 5% Crops 56% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Use Access Capacity Environment Resources Crops 95% 31

Freshwater resources vulnerability Composition of virtual water import flows by different water resources conditions 5.1% 0.3% Falkenmark Water Stress Index Water Poverty Index 94.6% No stress Stress Scarcity 36% 10 most water sustainable countries 64% Other countries 5.2% 0.1% Water Scarcity Index 35.0% 59.7% Low water stress Medium low water stress Medium high water stress High water stress 85% 15% 5 most water sustainable countries Other countries 32

Study implications In the last few decades, Singapore dietary preferences shifted from cereal grains to meat consumption. It is unlikely this trend will vary by much in the next few decades. Singapore will need to continue engage with water-rich countries for food security. Virtual water trade improves food security, freshwater availability and livelihoods for water-scarce countries like Singapore. The assessment on recent food trade and virtual water trade provide a comprehensive assessment on consumption-based virtual water indication. The study analyzed how food consumption patterns can affect virtual water demand, and how changes in future food consumption patterns are likely have an impact on water use. The various water resources indices can be used to influence towards sustainable production and consumption and the results will give policy and decision maker an indication on what challenges need to be addressed. 33

Limitations of the study 1. Falkenmark Water Stress and Water Scarcity Index Water management plays a critical role in the sustainability of agriculture, especially in water scarce regions. The Falkenmark water stress index and water scarcity index are common indices used to measure water stress on a national scale. The indicators assume water availability within a country is evenly distributed and change in demand for water due to climatic, physiographic and socio-economic factors are not considered. Thus, both indicators do not give a complete picture of water scarcity. 2. Water Poverty Index On the other hand, the water poverty index is a holistic approach used to assess the water situation, especially in arid and semi arid regions. WPI covers a wider aspect of freshwater availability and use. However, the relative position depends on the countries selected. WPI give sensible results in freshwater sustainability of a country but the indicator is by no means to give an explicit condition of a country water resources and use. While no method can be a perfect model to measure sustainability, WPI can provide a mean to understand the complexity of water issues by incorporating physical, socio-economic and environmental aspects. 34

Recommendations 1. Commodities selected in this study The reliability of the study can be improved by providing a comprehensive estimate of virtual water flows. This can be achieved by analyzing additional items such as processed products. However, it is unlikely that the overall trend will change by much since the food items selected are already the most commonly consumed in Singapore. In addition, high consumption of industrial commodities also contributed significantly to the overall virtual water footprints (D. Vanham, 2011). 2. Blue versus green water use A more balanced assessment on the effects of freshwater systems is to look at what is blue versus green water use as the blue water use has a greater impact on global freshwater resources. Shift in dietary preferences for more water intensive meat products will result in intensification of production from grazing and mixed to industrial system. This would increase the overall water footprint of production as a result. 35

Recommendations 3. Climate change and food production Climate change affects crop production through direct impacts on the biophysical factors such as plant and animal growth and the physical infrastructure associated with food processing and distribution (Schmidhuber and Tubiello, 2007) Recent research has suggested that some impacts of climate change are occurring more rapidly than previously anticipated (Parry et al., 2007). The crop water requirement per unit of crop produced is relatively high in regions with high evaporative demand. Nearly 50 % of crop yield is attributed to the influence of climatic factors. 36

Conclusions 1. Singapore s Virtual Water Import Flows In the last few decades, Singapore dietary preferences shifted from cereal grains to meat consumption. It is unlikely this trend will vary by much in the next few decades. Singapore will need to continue engage with water-rich countries for food security. Singapore gross virtual water volumes imported for the period related to trade in crops and livestock was 3,473 million m 3 per year or 2,078 litres per capita daily consumption. Livestock products contributed to the largest percentage of gross total virtual water consumption in Singapore (44%), followed by cereals (37%), fruits and vegetables (16%) & roots (3%). The high proportion of virtual water import flows from livestock is due shift in food consumption towards animal products which are generally water intensive. The six major food producing countries that contributed to 80% of GVWI in Singapore are Thailand (778 Mm 3 /yr), Malaysia (691 Mm 3 /yr), Brazil (586 Mm 3 /yr), Australia (412 Mm 3 /yr), USA (217 Mm 3 /yr) and India (168 Mm 3 /yr). 37

Conclusions 2. Significances of the study The study examines whether virtual water consumption related to trade in crops and livestock products is sustainable in Singapore. A sustainable country should account for its impacts beyond its borders. The ability of global freshwater resources to meet future food demand is highly dependent on consumption patterns within the country. The average virtual water consumption is more than 10 times the average domestic water consumption of 150 litres per capita daily consumption (PUB, 2014). Although the water supply system of Singapore is highly regarded as a role model for other countries, the virtual water consumption of the average citizen within the country is not sustainable. Despite the physical or monetary saving for Singapore to import products from water-efficient countries may not be significant, virtual water is still an important topic that can help inform public policy. Consumption behaviour has a determining influence on virtual water trade and every individual s commitment counts towards protecting the global freshwater resources. 38

Thank You 39