Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Promoting resilience for food, energy, and water interdependencies

  • Published:
Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents relationships among food, energy, and water (FEW) systems, reflecting the interconnections among the energy/water, water/energy, water/food, and energy/food sectors. First, a unique approach uses metrics and quantification to reflect interdependencies among these sectors. Next, changes in food technology and practices are put forth in terms of impacts changes are likely to produce for a set of FEW system relationships. Organic farming or shifts in food consumption patterns, such as reduced meat consumption, are two examples of changes in food technology and practices that could affect water and energy use. From a policy perspective, changes in energy and water policy can potentially facilitate increased water conservation and greater use of renewable energy sources; such policy shifts are addressed in terms of changes to metrics and/or their values. The purpose of this work is to establish a network model that quantifies interdependencies among different sectors in terms of resource usage. The model is flexible and can accommodate other factors such as cyberphysical and logical interdependencies. The established model that these metrics provide inputs for enables analysis and design of the resilience mechanisms for FEW complex systems. Examples are used to illustrate the concepts developed in this work.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amenumey SE, Capel PD (2014) Fertilizer consumption and energy input for 16 crops in the United States. Nat Resour Res 23(3):299–309

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2013) 2013 Report card for America’s infrastructure. Available at http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/

  • Blunden J, Arndt DS (2015) State of the climate in 2014. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 96(7):S1–S267. Available at http://ametsoc.org/soc-2014.pdf

  • Brandes U (2001) A faster algorithm for betweenness centrality. J Math Sociol 25(2):163–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buzby JC, Farah-Wells H, Hyman J (2014) The estimated amount, value, and calories of postharvest food losses at the retail and consumer levels in the United States. USDA-ERS Economic Information Bulletin 2014 Feb 1(121)

  • Canning P, Charles A, Huang S, Polenske KR, Waters A (2010) Energy use in the US food system. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter N (2010) Energy’s water demand: trends, vulnerabilities, and management. US Congress, Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Ceccarelli S (2014) GM crops, organic agriculture and breeding for sustainability. Sustainability 6(7):4273–4286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chand S (2015) 9 Major limitations faced by input-output analysis. Available at http://www.yourarticlelibrary.com/economics/9majorlimitationsfacedbyinputoutputanalysiseconomics/28951/

  • Cook BI, Ault TR and Smerdon JE (2015) Unprecedented 21st century drought risk in the American Southwest and Central Plains. Science Advances 1 (1) DOI:10.1126/sciadv.1400082

  • Cooley L, Ved RR (2012) Scaling up—from vision to large‐scale change. A management framework for practitioners, second edition. http://www.msiworldwide.com/wp-content/uploads/MSI-Scaling-Up-Framework-2nd-Edition.pdf

  • Drinkwater LE, Letourneau DK, Workneh F, Van Bruggen AHC, Shennan C (1995) Fundamental differences between conventional and organic tomato agroecosystems in California. Ecol Appl 1098–1112

  • Fuglie K, MacDonald JM, Ball VE (2007) Productivity growth in US agriculture. USDA-ERS Economic Brief 9

  • Gelfand I, Snapp SS, Robertson GP (2010) Energy efficiency of conventional, organic, and alternative cropping systems for food and fuel at a site in the US Midwest. Environ Sci Technol 44(10):4006–4011

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert N (2014) Cross-bred crops get fit faster. Nature 513:292. doi:10.1038/513292a

  • Guthrie J, Lin BH, Okrent A, Volpe R. (2013) Americans’ food choices at home and away: how do they compare with recommendations? Amber Waves 2013 Feb 1:33

  • Hadas Y, Ceder A (2010) Public transit network connectivity spatial-based performance indicators, 2143rd edn. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, pp 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton A, Balogh SB, Maxwell A, Hall CAS (2013) Efficiency of edible agriculture in Canada and the U.S. over the past three and four decades. Energies 6:1764–1793

  • Hill H (2009) Comparing energy used in conventional and organic cropping systems. ATTRA-National Sustainable Agriculture Information Service

  • Howard PH (2015) Intellectual property and consolidation in the seed industry. Crop Sci 55(6):2489–2495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Imamura F, Micha R, Khatibzadeh S, Fahimi S, Shi P, Powles J, Mozaffarian D, Global Burden of Diseases Nutrition and Chronic Diseases Expert Group (NutriCoDE) (2015) Dietary quality among men and women in 187 countries in 1990 and 2010: a systematic assessment. Lancet Glob Health 3(3):e132–e142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) WGII AR5 Climate Change (2014) Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Summary for Policymakers. Available at https://ipcc-wg2.gov/AR5/images/uploads/IPCC_WG2AR5_SPM_Approved.pdf

  • Kearney J (2010) Food consumption trends and drivers. Philos Trans R Soc B 365(1554):2793–2807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kesmodel D (Oct. 25, 2015) California’s growers bear brunt of drought woes. Wall Street Journal. Available at http://www.wsj.com/articles/californias-growers-bear-brunt-of-drought-woes-1445765403

  • Kitzes J (2013) An introduction to environmentally-extended input-output analysis. Resources 2:489–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klümper W, Qaim M (2014) A meta-analysis of the impacts of genetically modified crops. PLoS One 9(11):e111629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W (1936) Quantitative input and output relations in the economic systems of the United States. Rev Econ Stat 18:105–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W (1941) The structure of American economy, 1919–1929: an empirical application of equilibrium analysis. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W (1951) The structure of American economy, 1919–1939: an empirical application of equilibrium analysis-enlarged. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W (1966) Essays in economics: theories, theorizing, facts, and policies. Transaction Publishers, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Leontief W (1986) Input-output economics. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenberg E (2002) Agriculture and the environment. Handb Agric Econ 2:1249–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Medin J (2015) In drought-ridden California, the classic lawn loses. New York Times. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/27/us/in-drought-ridden-california-the-classic-lawn-loses-ground.html. October 26.

  • Mekonnen MM, Hoekstra AY (2012) A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products ecosystems. Ecosystems 15:401–415. doi:10.1007/s10021-011-9517-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Michulak P, Ulsh CZ, Reider C, Seidel R, Haberern J, Hepperly P (2004) Water, agriculture, and you. The Rodale Institute. Available at http://strauscom.com/rodale/way.pdf.

  • Miernyk WH (1967) The elements of input-output analysis. Random House

  • Monsanto (undated). Why does Monsanto sue farmers who save seeds? Available at http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/why-does-monsanto-sue-farmers-who-save-seeds.aspx

  • Motter AE, Lai Y-C (2002) Cascade-based attacks on complex networks. Phys Rev E 66:65–68

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council, National Academies (2011) Sustainability and the US EPA. The National Academies Press, Washington, D.C

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman MEJ (2010) Networks: an introduction. Oxford University Press, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • OFRF (2015) Organic sales, farm growth soar in 2014. Available at http://www.ofrf.org/news/organic-sales-farm-growth-soar-2014

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Input-output tables. Available at http://www.oecd.org/trade/input-outputtables.htm

  • Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2011) Reviews of risk management policies future global shocks improving risk governance. Available at http://www.oecd.org/governance/48329024.pdf

  • Penn State Extension (2015) Weed management in organic crops. Available at http://extension.psu.edu/pests/weeds/organic

  • Pimentel D, Pimentel M (2003) Sustainability of meat-based and plant-based diets and the environment. Am J Clin Nutr 78(3):660S–663S

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Qaim M (2010) The benefits of genetically modified crops—and the costs of inefficient regulation, resources for the future. Available at http://www.rff.org/blog/2010/benefits-genetically-modified-crops-and-costs-inefficient-regulation

  • Reganold JP, Glover JD, Andrews PK, Hinman HR (2001) Sustainability of three apple production systems. Nature 410(6831):926–930

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rinaldi SM, Peerenboom JP, Kelly TK (2001) Identifying, understanding and analyzing critical infrastructure interdependencies. IEEE Control Syst Mag 11–25

  • Russo T, Lall U, Wen H, Williams M (2014) Assessment of trends in groundwater levels across the United States. Columbia Water Center, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith LG, Williams AG, Pearce BD (2015) The energy efficiency of organic agriculture: a review. Renew Agric Food Syst 30:280–301. doi:10.1017/S1742170513000471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (2005) Utility and network interdependencies: what state regulators need to know., Technical assistance brief on critical infrastructure protection

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman D, Cassman KG, Matson PA, Naylor R, Polasky S (2002) Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices. Nature 418(6898):671–677

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tuomisto HL, Hodge ID, Riordan P, Macdonald DW (2012) Does organic farming reduce environmental impacts?—a meta-analysis of European research. J Environ Manag 112:309–320

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (UN WCED) (1987) Our common future. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • US Department of Agriculture (2015) USDA and EPA join with private sector, charitable organizations to set nation’s first food waste reduction goals. Press release Release No. 0257.15. Available at http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=2015/09/0257.xml.

  • US Department of Agriculture, AMS (undated) The national organic program. Available at http://www.ams.usda.gov/about-ams/programs-offices/national-organic-program.

  • US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service (ERS) (2015) California drought: farms. Available at http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/in-the-news/california-drought-farm-and-food-impacts/california-drought-farms.aspx

  • US Department of Energy (2013) Comparing the impacts of northeast hurricanes on energy infrastructure. [Online] Available from: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2013/04/f0/Northeast%20Storm%20Comparison_FINAL_041513c.pdf

  • US Department of Energy (2014) The water-energy nexus: challenges and opportunities. US DOE, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/06/f16/Water%20Energy%20Nexus%20Report%20June%202014.pdf

  • US Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy (2015) Energy intensity indicators: indicators data. Available at http://www1.eere.energy.gov/analysis/eii_trend_data.html

  • US Department of Homeland Security (2010) Water and wastewater systems sector-specific plan an annex to the National Infrastructure Protection Plan. US DHS, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nipp-ssp-water-(2010)pdf

  • US Department of Homeland Security (2013) 2013 partnering for critical infrastructure security and resilience. US DHS, Washington, DC. Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/NIPP%202013_Partnering%20for%20Critical%20Infrastructure%20Security%20and%20Resilience_508_0.pdf

  • US-Canada Power System Outage Task Force (2004) Final report on the August 14th 2003 blackout in the United States and Canada: causes and recommendations. April 2004. Available at http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/oeprod/DocumentsandMedia/BlackoutFinal-Web.pdf

  • Vale LJ (2014) The politics of resilient cities: whose resilience and whose city? Build Res Inf 42(2):191–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh J, et al (2014) Ch. 2: Our changing climate. Climate change impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, In: Melillo, JM, Richmond, TC and Yohe, GW, Eds., US Global Change Research Program, 19-67. doi:10.7930/J0KW5CXT. pp. 19-67

  • Wasserman D, Faust K (2009) Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • West PC, Gerber JS, Engstrom PM, Mueller ND, Brauman KA, Carlson KM, Cassidy ES, Johnston M, MacDonald GK, Ray DK, Siebert S (2014) Leverage points for improving global food security and the environment. Science 345(6194):325–328

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang TX, Lin, Rogers DH, FR Lamm (2015) Adaptation of irrigation infrastructure on irrigation demands under future drought in the USA. Earth Interactions. 05/2015; DOI:10.1175/EI-D-14-0035.1

  • Zimmerman R (2012) Transport, the environment and security. Making the connection. Cheltenham. Edward Elgar Publishing, Ltd, UK and Northampton, MA

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman R (2014a) Network attributes of critical infrastructure, vulnerability, and consequence assessment, Chapter 372. In: Deodatis G, Ellingwood BR, Frangopol DM (eds) Safety, reliability, risk and life-cycle performance of structures and infrastructures. Taylor & Francis Group, CRC Press, London, UK, pp 2777–2782

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman R (2014b) Planning restoration of vital infrastructure services following Hurricane Sandy: lessons learned for energy and transportation. J Extreme Events 1(1):1–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman R (2015) Resilient urban infrastructure for adapting to environmental disruptions. In: Seto KC, Solecki WD, Griffith CA (eds) Handbook on urbanization and global environmental change. Routledge, London, pp 488–512

    Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman R, Restrepo CE (2006) The next step: quantifying infrastructure interdependencies to improve security. Int J Crit Infrastruct 2(2/3):215–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This paper is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under the following NSF grants: number 1441140 Resilient Interdependent Infrastructure Processes and Systems (RIPS) type 1—A meta-network system framework for resilient analysis and design of modern interdependent critical infrastructures; number 1541164 Critical Resilient Interdependent Infrastructure Systems and Processes (CRISP) type 1—Reductionist and integrative approaches to improve the resiliency of multi-scale interdependent critical infrastructure; and number 1444755 (Arizona State University lead)—Urban Resilience to Extreme Weather Related Events Sustainability Research Network (UREx SRN). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. The authors gratefully acknowledge the input from the anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Civil Infrastructure Systems (www.nyu.edu/icis), Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, New York University, 295 Lafayette Street–2nd Floor, New York, NY, 10012, USA

    Rae Zimmerman

  2. Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Tandon School of Engineering, New York University, 5 MetroTech Center-LC200A, Brooklyn, NY, 11201, USA

    Quanyan Zhu

  3. Departments of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, Steinhardt School, New York University, New York, NY, 10003, USA

    Carolyn Dimitri

Authors
  1. Rae Zimmerman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Quanyan Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carolyn Dimitri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rae Zimmerman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zimmerman, R., Zhu, Q. & Dimitri, C. Promoting resilience for food, energy, and water interdependencies. J Environ Stud Sci 6, 50–61 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0362-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-016-0362-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation