Abstract

The inclusion of environmental flow requirements (EFRs) in global water scarcity assessments is essential to obtain a reasonable representation of the water scarcity status. However, at a global scale, the quantification of EFRs is subject to large uncertainties resulting from various methods. So far, it is unclear to what extent the uncertainties in EFRs affect global water scarcity assessments. In this study, we examined the differences between EFR estimation methods and quantified their effects on spatially explicit water scarcity assessments, based on reconstructed global water withdrawal data and naturalized streamflow simulations. The global mean EFRs estimated by different methods ranged from 129 m3 s−1 to 572 m3 s−1. Consequently, with the fulfillment of the EFRs, the area under water scarcity ranged between 8% and 52% of the total global land area, and the affected population ranged between 28% and 60% of the total population. In India and Northern China, 44%–66% and 22%–58% of the country’s land area, respectively, is affected by water scarcity; this percentage is higher than that found in other countries. The effects of different EFRs on water scarcity assessment are large in many regions, but relatively small in regions that experience intensive water use due to anthropological activities (such as Northern China and India). Through this study, we have put forth the need for the reconciliation of the estimates of EFRs to produce more reasonable and consistent water scarcity assessments.

Details

Title
Environmental flow requirements largely reshape global surface water scarcity assessment
Author
Liu, Xingcai 1   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Liu, Wenfeng 2   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Liu, Liu 2   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Tang, Qiuhong 3   VIAFID ORCID Logo  ; Liu, Junguo 4 ; Yang, Hong 5 

 Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Ueberlandstrasse 133, CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland; Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11A, Datun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, People’s Republic of China 
 Center for Agricultural Water Research in China, College of Water Resources and Civil Engineering, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100083, People’s Republic of China 
 Key Laboratory of Water Cycle and Related Land Surface Processes, Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 11A, Datun Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, People’s Republic of China; College of Resources and Environment, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, People’s Republic of China 
 School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, People’s Republic of China 
 Eawag, Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, Ueberlandstrasse 133, CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland; Department of Environmental Sciences, MGU, University of Basel, Petersplatz 1, CH-4003 Basel, Switzerland 
Publication year
2021
Publication date
Oct 2021
Publisher
IOP Publishing
e-ISSN
17489326
Source type
Scholarly Journal
Language of publication
English
ProQuest document ID
2580688493
Copyright
© 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.