1.
AQUEDUCTDATA & METHODOLOGYPAUL REIG, TOM PARRIS, AND FRANCIS GASSERT February 20, 2013

2.
AGENDA Introduction Modeling Water Supply and Demand – Tom Parris Aqueduct Indicators – Paul Reig Aggregation and scoring – Francis Gassert Q&A

3.
RISKS TO:GOVERNMENTSCOMPANIESINVESTORS Photo: NOAA

4.
DETAILED, COMPARABLE, GLOBALWATER RISK INFORMATION Photo: NASA

5.
UNDERSTANDING RISK: AQUEDUCT FRAMEWORK Overall Water Risk Physical Risk: Physical Risk: Regulatory & QUANTITY QUALITY Reputational Risk  Baseline water stress  Inter-annual variability  Seasonal variability  Media coverage  Return flow ratio  Flood occurrence  Access to water  Upstream protected land  Drought severity  Threatened amphibians  Upstream storage  Groundwater stress

6.
WHERE WE PILOT TESTED: KEY BASINS

7.
HOW WE EVOLVED: GLOBAL MAPPING

8.
BUILDING ON SCIENCE: EXPERT REVIEWERS CDP Water Disclosure Project  The World Bank Ceres  US Environmental Protection Agency Columbia University  University of Michigan at Ann Arbor Deloitte Consulting LLP  University of North Carolina Chapel Hill Global Adaptation Institute  University of Virginia Global Water Strategies  Water Footprint Network Nanjing University  World Business Council for Sustainable Development National Geographic  Yale University Pacific Institute The Nature Conservancy

9.
DATA: SELECTION CRITERIAStep 1: Literature reviewStep 2: Public domain & global coverageStep 3: Comparative analysis to evaluate:  granularity,  time coverage  sourceStep 4: Selection of data source

10.
Tom Parris | Vice President | ISciencesMODELING WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND

11.
UNDERSTANDING RISK: AQUEDUCT FRAMEWORK Overall Water Risk Physical Risk: Physical Risk: Regulatory & QUANTITY QUALITY Reputational Risk  Baseline water stress  Inter-annual variability  Seasonal variability  Media coverage  Return flow ratio  Flood occurrence  Access to water  Upstream protected land  Drought severity  Threatened amphibians  Upstream storage  Groundwater stress

12.
OVERVIEW MODELING: WATER SUPPLY AND DEMAND Hydrologically Withdrawals & connected Runoff consumptive use catchments Catchments Demand: Withdrawals & Flow accumulator consumptive use Source: Runoff Flow accumulation Total blue Available blue Supply: Total and available water (Bt) water (Ba) blue water

13.
CatchmentsCATCHMENTS Global Drainage Basin Database (GDBD; n=73074) Aggregated to <100,000 km2 target Mean area = 8804 km2 (n=14998)

14.
WATER DEMAND: BASELINE 20101. Source data: withdrawals by sector (agricultural, domestic, and industrial) reported by country (FAO), baselined to 20102. Spatially disaggregate by sector  Agricultural withdrawals disaggregated by Global Map of Irrigated Areas (2000)  Domestic withdrawals disaggregated by Gridded Population of the World (2010) and Nighttime Lights (2010)  Industrial withdrawals disaggregated by Nighttime Lights (2010)3. Multiply each sector by consumptive use ratio4. Re-aggregate to basins and sum sectoral consumptive and total withdrawals

15.
Withdrawal Disaggregation MethodologyWATER DEMAND: INPUT DATA Sector Variable Source Water withdrawals FAO Aquastat All sectors Pacific Institute GDP World Bank Population World Bank Average annual precipitation FAO Aquastat Total renewable water supply FAO Aquastat Sectoral water withdrawal ratio Calculated Irrigated area FAOSTAT Agricultural FAO Aquastat Freydank & Siebert 2008 Agricultural land area World Bank Industrial CO2 emissions World Bank Electricity, total net generation Energy Information Administration Coal production Energy Information Administration Refinery Processing Gain Energy Information Administration Domestic Urban population World Bank

16.
WATER DEMAND: BASELINE TO 2010 Start with reported national withdrawals (FAO Aquastat) by sector (domestic, industrial, agricultural) (black points) Project using two random and two fixed effects regression models (light points) Withdrawals reported 2008-2010 were not modeled (vertical dashed line) Average four models to estimate national withdrawals for 2010 (dark red points) Regressions explained 94-99% of the total variation.

17.
Withdrawal Disaggregation MethodologyWATER DEMAND: DISAGGREGATION1. Input data: withdrawals by sector (agricultural, domestic, and industrial) reported by country (FAO), baselined to 20102. Spatially disaggregate by sector  Agricultural withdrawals disaggregated by Global Map of Irrigated Areas (2000)  Domestic withdrawals disaggregated by Gridded Population of the World (2010) and Nighttime Lights (2010)  Industrial withdrawals disaggregated by Nighttime Lights (2010)3. Multiply each sector by consumptive use ratio4. Re-aggregate to basins and sum sectoral consumptive and total withdrawals

18.
WATER DEMAND: AGRICULTURE Global Map of Irrigation Area

19.
WATER DEMAND: INDUSTRY Nighttime Lights (2010)

20.
WATER DEMAND: DOMESTIC Gridded Population of the World (2010) Nighttime Lights (2010)

21.
WATER DEMAND: TOTAL WITHDRAWALS Total withdrawals (Ut) are the sum of agricultural, 𝑈 𝑡 = 𝑈 𝑎𝑎𝑎 + 𝑈 𝑑𝑑𝑑 + 𝑈 𝑖𝑖𝑖 domestic, and industrial withdrawals

22.
WATER DEMAND: CONSUMPTIVE USE1. Input data: withdrawals by sector (agricultural, domestic, and industrial) reported by country (FAO), baselined to 20102. Spatially disaggregate by sector  Agricultural withdrawals disaggregated by Global Map of Irrigated Areas (2000)  Domestic withdrawals disaggregated by Gridded Population of the World (2010) and Nighttime Lights (2010)  Industrial withdrawals disaggregated by Nighttime Lights (2010)3. Multiply each sector by consumptive use ratio4. Re-aggregate to basins and sum sectoral consumptive and total withdrawals

23.
WATER DEMAND: CONSUMPTIVE USE Consumptive use (Ct) is the sum of sectoral use times the sectoral consumptive use ratio (cr) (Shiklomanov and Rodda 2003) 𝐶𝑡 = 𝑈 𝑎𝑎𝑎 × 𝑐𝑐 𝑎𝑎𝑎 + 𝑈 𝑑𝑑𝑑 × 𝑐𝑐 𝑑𝑑𝑑 + 𝑈 𝑖𝑖𝑖 × 𝑐𝑐𝑖𝑖𝑖

24.
WATER SOURCE: RUNOFF evaluated 4 datasets (UNH/GRDC, CFSR, MERRA-Land, GLDAS-2) GLDAS-2, 1°, NOAH monthly (summed to annual) 1948-2008 (used 1950-2008) directly resampled to 1km without interpolation

25.
MODELING: FLOW ACCUMULATION runoffa Runoff  Precipitation minus evapotranspiration, loss to groundwater, and increase in soil runoffb Bta moisture. Total Blue Water (Bt)  Accumulated runoff  Equivalent to naturalized flow. Btb

26.
MODELING: FLOW ACCUMULATION runoffa Runoff  Precipitation minus evaporation, transpiration, deep groundwater recharge, and change in soil moisture Baa runoffb Total Blue Water  Accumulated runoff consumptive usea  Equivalent to naturalized flow Available Blue Water (Ba) Bab  Upstream runoff minus consumptive use, plus runoff  Loosely equivalent to surface water consumptive useb and shallow groundwater

27.
WATER SUPPLY: TOTAL BLUE WATER Total blue water (Bt) is the sum of naturalized (uninhibited) runoff

28.
WATER SUPPLY: AVAILABLE BLUE WATER Available blue water (Ba) is the sum of upstream runoff minus consumptive use

29.
Paul Reig | Aqueduct Project | WRIAQUEDUCT’S WATER RISK INDICATORS

30.
UNDERSTANDING RISK : AQUEDUCT FRAMEWORK Overall Water Risk Physical Risk: Physical Risk: Regulatory & QUANTITY QUALITY Reputational Risk  Baseline water stress  Inter-annual variability  Seasonal variability  Media coverage  Return flow ratio  Flood occurrence  Access to water  Upstream protected land  Drought severity  Threatened amphibians  Upstream storage  Groundwater stress

31.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (2010) 𝐁𝐁𝐁𝐁𝐁𝐁𝐁𝐁 𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)

32.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈𝐈 𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)

33.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒 𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯𝐯 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚𝑚 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)

34.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008) Data: Lehner et al. GRanD

35.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 1950 − 2008𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔𝐔 𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩𝐩 𝐥𝐥𝐥𝐥 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 1950 − 2008 Data: IUCN, UNEP

36.
SUPPLY AND DEMAND INDICATORS 𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈𝑈 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑢𝑢𝑢 (2010) 𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑 𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟 𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫 = 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 (1950 − 2008)

37.
UNDERSTANDING RISK : AQUEDUCT FRAMEWORK Overall Water Risk Physical Risk: Physical Risk: Regulatory & QUANTITY QUALITY Reputational Risk  Baseline water stress  Inter-annual variability  Seasonal variability  Media coverage  Return flow ratio  Flood occurrence  Access to water  Upstream protected land  Drought severity  Threatened amphibians  Upstream storage  Groundwater stress

38.
OTHER INDICATORS Indicator Data Source Scale Brakenridge, Dartmouth Flood occurrence Polygons Flood Observatory 1 degree raster Drought severity Sheffield and Wood Groundwater stress Gleeson et al. Major aquifers Media coverage Google Country Access to water WHO, UNICEF CountryThreatened amphibians IUCN Red List Polygons

39.
Francis Gassert | Aqueduct Project | WRIAQUEDUCT’S WATER RISK FRAMEWORK

40.
UNDERSTANDING RISK : AQUEDUCT FRAMEWORK Overall Water Risk Physical Risk: Physical Risk: Regulatory & QUANTITY QUALITY Reputational Risk  Baseline water stress  Inter-annual variability  Seasonal variability  Media coverage  Return flow ratio  Flood occurrence  Access to water  Upstream protected land  Drought severity  Threatened amphibians  Upstream storage  Groundwater stress

41.
ENABLING COMPARABILITY : THRESHOLDSThresholds: 1. Create categories for communication 2. Enable scoring and aggregationThresholds determined using:  existing literature  governmental or intergovernmental guidelines  range and distribution of indicator values  expert judgment

42.
NORMALIZING AND SCORING Values mapped over thresholds using continuous functions Raw value (r) : 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.8 Score : 0 1 2 3 4 5 ln 𝑟 − ln 𝑡1 𝑓BWS 𝑟 = min(5, max(0, + 1 )) ln 𝑏𝑏𝑏𝑏

43.
PUTTING IT TOGETHER : AGGREGATION

44.
PUTTING IT TOGETHER : AGGREGATIONWeighted average  For each region (j): ∑ 𝑥 𝑖𝑖 𝑤 𝑖 𝑎𝑗 = 𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑖 𝑖𝑖 {𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 𝑥 𝑖𝑖 ≠ 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛} ∑ 𝑤𝑖Re-normalize to display full range of relative values  Final displayed “overall water risk” (sj): 𝑎 𝑗 − min(𝑎) 𝑠𝑗 = 5 max 𝑎 − min(𝑎)

45.
UNIQUE USERS : TAILORED WEIGHTING WRI Default Agriculture Food & Beverage Chemicals Electric power Semi-conductor Oil & Gas MiningConstruction Materials Textile 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%  Quantity  Quality  Regulatory and reputational

46.
BALANCING INDICATORS : SETTING WEIGHTSExposure to risk varies– users can set own weightsDefault weights set by:  WRI water expert panel  Corporate disclosure documentation  Industry leader review

47.
PUBLICATIONS Aqueduct Global Maps 2.0:http://www.wri.org/publication/aqueduct-metadata-global Aqueduct Water Risk Framework:http://www.wri.org/publication/aqueduct-water-risk-framework Aqueduct Data and Methodology: in prep

48.
Thank you for joining! CONTACT US Paul Reig | preig@wri.orgFrancis Gassert | fgassert@wri.orgWRI.org/Aqueduct