4.7 Article

Regional water footprint evaluation in China: A case of Liaoning

期刊

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
卷 442, 期 -, 页码 215-224

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.049

关键词

Water footprint; Input-output analysis; Water management; Trade balance; Liaoning

资金

  1. Natural Science Foundation of China [71033004]
  2. Ministry of Science and Technology [2011BAJ06B01, 2011DFA91810]
  3. Chinese Academy of Sciences' One Hundred Talent Program [2008-318]
  4. Ministry of Environment of Japan [E-1105, K113002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Water-related problems are currently second only to energy issues as threats to human society. North China is a region that is facing severe water scarcity problems. In order to provide appropriate water mitigation policies a regional study is completed. Under this circumstance, Liaoning Province, a typical heavy industrial province in north China is chosen as a case study region. The input-output analysis method is employed in order to evaluate the water footprint both from production and consumption perspectives. The results show that the total water footprint of Liaoning in 2007 was 7.30 billion m(3), a 84.6% of internal water footprint and a 15.4% external water footprint. The water trade balance of Liaoning was 2.68 billion m(3), indicating that Liaoning was a net water export region, although water shortages are becoming a more serious concern. The Agriculture and Food and beverage production sectors are found to have the highest water footprint, water intensity, water exports, and water trade balance. Based upon Liaoning realities policy implications and suggestions are made, including industrial and trade structure adjustment, application of water efficient technology and management measures, and appropriate capacity-building efforts. The methodology and findings may be useful for investigation of water footprints throughout various regions of the world. (C) 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据