EN中文

Journal of Resources and Ecology >

2019 , Vol. 10 >Issue 6: 574 - 583

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764X.2019.06.002

Ecological Carrying Capacity

Analysis of Water Resources Carrying Capacity of the “Belt and Road” Initiative Countries based on Virtual Water Theory

  • ZHENG Xin 1 ,
  • XU Zengrang , 2, *
Expand
  • 1. School of Earth Sciences and Resources, China University of Geosciences, Beijing 100083, China
  • 2. Institute of Geographic Sciences and Natural Resources Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100101, China
XU Zengrang, E-mail:

Received date: 2019-06-29

  Accepted date: 2019-08-29

  Online published: 2019-12-09

Supported by

The Tibetan Scientific-Technology Project(Z2016C01G01/04)

The National Natural Science Foundation of China(41571496)

The National Key Research and Development Programme(2016YFC0503403)

Copyright

Copyright reserved © 2019
Fold

Abstract

Most countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative are faced with a shortage of water resources. However, successful implementation of the initiative depends on water availability to support economic and social development. We designed a water resources carrying capacity evaluation index system, assigned grades and weights to each evaluation index and calculated a water resources carrying index for the 65 countries along the route. We used virtual water theory to analyze China’s net virtual water import from key bulk agricultural products through international trade. For more than half of the countries along the route, their water resources will be unable to support the economic development that will be necessary for fulfilling the goals of the Initiative. As a country with insufficient water resources carrying capacity, China is a net virtual water importer in the virtual water trade. This virtual water trade can improve China’s water resources support capacity, and ensure China’s water and food security for the future.

Key words： water resources carrying capacity; virtual water; the “Belt and Road”; agricultural products trade

Cite this article

ZHENG Xin , XU Zengrang . Analysis of Water Resources Carrying Capacity of the “Belt and Road” Initiative Countries based on Virtual Water Theory[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2019 , 10(6) : 574 -583 . DOI: 10.5814/j.issn.1674-764X.2019.06.002

1 Introduction

Pressure on the world’s water resources is increasing. By 2050, global water demand will have increased by 20%-30%. More than two thousand million people will be living in countries with severe water shortages, and about four thousand million people will suffer from severe water shortages for at least one month per year (WWAP, 2019). Water is a strategic resource for sustainable development. The impact of its distribution, supply and demand on the steady development of the national economy has gradually increased. Water distribution, supply and demand have become important indicators in the evaluation of a country’s comprehensive competitiveness (Zhang et al., 2012). Studying and correctly evaluating a country’s water resources carrying capacity, and coordinating the water needs of the natural environment, livelihoods, and industrial and agricultural development are of great importance for the sustainable development of that country.
Water resources carrying capacity (WRCC) has been defined in various ways by different scholars. There are three main types of definitions: 1) WRCC is the maximum amount of water available for human use. For example, Xu (1993) considers WRCC as the maximum amount of water available for supporting industrial and agricultural production, supporting people’s lives and environmental protection at certain technological and economic levels and social production conditions. 2) WRCC is the maximum population supported by the water resources. Ruan et al. (1998) defines WRCC as the number of people that can be supported by the water resources in a certain region under certain production conditions and normal material living conditions at different time scales in the future. 3) WRCC is determined by the ability of water resources to support the sustainable development of social and economic systems. Hui et al. (2001) believes that WRCC is a field of research that focuses a specific historical stage of development. Water resources carrying capacity research takes the foreseeable technical, economic and social development level as its basis, is based on principles of sustainable development, and aims to maintain healthy environmental conditions. After reasonable amounts of optimization and configuration, it will become the most significant supporting element for the social and economic development in the region. There are no fundamental differences between these different definitions of WRCC. They all emphasize the concept of supporting capacity (Xia et al., 2002).
Table 1 Regions and countries along the “Belt and Road” initiative
Regions Countries Total
Southeast Asia Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Philippines, Brunei, Timor-Leste 11
Eastern Europe Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova 6
Southern Europe Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Romania, Macedonia, Bulgaria, Albania 9
South Asia Sri Lanka, Maldives, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Afghanistan 8
West Asia Iran, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Oman, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan 18
Central Europe Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary 4
Central Asia Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan 5
Other Egypt, China, Mongolia, Russia 4
Water footprint can be an effective tool for managing a country’s scarce water resources in support of sustainable development. Hoekstra proposed the concept of water footprint in 2003 to measure the moisture content of all goods and services consumed by a person or a country (Hoekstra, 2003). A product’s water footprint includes its blue, green and gray water footprints. The blue water footprint refers to the consumption of surface and groundwater resources in the supply chain of products. The green water footprint refers to the consumption of rainwater resources that will not become runoff. The gray water footprint is an indicator related to pollution. A product’s water footprint can also be referred to as its virtual water content (Hoekstra et al., 2012). Virtual water flows occur when products are exchanged via international trade (Novo et al., 2009), and can generate water savings in importing countries. Countries with water shortage can import water-intensive products from water-rich countries through trade, which is a practice also known as virtual water strategy (Cheng, 2003).
Scholars at home and abroad have conducted extensive research on virtual water trade, focusing on three aspects.
(1) Virtual water flow of a country that is involved in international trade. Ma et al. (2011) performed an empirical analysis of the virtual water flow in China’s international trade of agricultural products between 2005 and 2009, within the context of a virtual water strategy. Brindha (2017) studied the virtual water content of crops and livestock products traded between India and its partners from 1986 to 2013, and analyzed the specific virtual water trade in India.
(2) Virtual water flow between two countries. Wei et al. (2015) calculated and analyzed the virtual water import and export generated by the trade of agricultural products between China and ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) countries. Lamastra et al. (2017) studied the virtual water trade of the top ten agricultural products between Italy and China.
(3) Virtual water flow between regions within a country. Mubako (2011) used water footprint and input-output analysis
to quantify the virtual water flows of American states, and compared the quantitative results with actual agricultural water consumption. Han (2012) calculated the virtual water flows between eight regions of China from 2000 to 2009, and analyzed the flow patterns from multiple perspectives.
China is one of the world’s leading agricultural producers and exporters as well as an important consumer of agricultural products. China also has insufficient water resources. Water shortage can be alleviated to a certain extent through the use of virtual water. In 2013, China put forward the “Belt and Road” initiative1(1The “Belt and Road” is also called the “Silk Road Economic Belt” and the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road”. The “Silk Road Economic Belt” has three routes, namely, the northern route dominated by Eurasia, the middle route dominated by oil and gas pipelines, and the southern route dominated by transnational highways. The 21st Century Maritime Silk Road runs from ports on China’s southeast coast, passing south to the South China Sea, into the Indian Ocean and Persian Gulf, and onward as far as East Africa and Europe. There are 65 countries involved in both the “Silk Road Economic Belt” and the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road”, so this paper focuses on these 65 countries as research objects.) to strengthen economic cooperation among countries and promote world peace and development (National Development and Reform Commission et al., 2015). The 65 countries along the route of the initiative generally have insufficient water resources. By analyzing the characteristics, development and use of water resources in the countries along the route, policy recommendations can be developed to help coordinate economic development and the sustainable use and conservation of water resources in these countries. On the basis of this rationale, this paper quantitatively analyzes the WRCC of countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative. From the Chinese perspective, net virtual water import through international trade in agricultural and livestock products is calculated, and the net virtual water import and major trading partners are analyzed. Finally, this study provides policy recommendations for China’s water use and conservation in order to promote the sustainable development of countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative.

2 Data and methods

2.1 The study area

The route of the “Belt and Road” initiative goes across Eurasia, and touches 65 countries in eight regions including Southeast Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, West Asia, Eastern Europe, Central Europe and Southern Europe.
2.1.1 Physical geography
The environment along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative is complex and diverse. The route crosses five climate zones. The temperature decreases as one travels from the southwest to the northeast. The terrain is complex. There are wide plateaus and high mountains, and large areas of plains and lowlands. The region is rich in soil diversity, and has more than 30 different soil types. Land cover is dominated by cultivated land, forest and grassland (Wu et al., 2018). Precipitation declines as one travels from the coast inland. Rainfall is the most abundant in the southeast and least abundant in the southwest. There are numerous river systems. The most abundant water resources are found in Southeast Asia and the least abundant are found in East Africa (Zuo et al., 2018).
2.1.2 Economic and social conditions
According to the World Bank’s world development indicators (https://data.worldbank.org/), the total land area of the countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative was 5.16×107 km2 in 2018, accounting for about 40% of the world’s total land area. In 2017, the total population of these countries was 4.664 thousand million, accounting for 61.94% of the world’s population. In 2017, these countries’ gross domestic product totaled US$ 25.7 thousand billion, accounting for 32% of the gross world product. In 2015, average gross national income per capita in these countries was US$ 5129, which was only 49% of the global average. Growth in the standard of living in the countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative falls behind the growth in economic development.

2.2 Methods

2.2.1 Calculation of water resources carrying capacity
Indices for evaluating WRCC were constructed on the basis of WRCC theory. The water resources carrying index, WRCI, was calculated for each of the 65 countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative. The WRCI was calculated by grading and weighting three evaluation indices. This WRCC evaluation index system comprehensively considers the combined effects of water resources, economic development, society and the environment (Zuo et al., 2004), and can reflect the natural and social attributes of water resources (Loucks, 2000). Referring to the indicator system in the analysis of water resources supply and demand (Water Conservancy Bureau of Hydrology, 1987) and another water resources evaluation indicator system (Zhu et al, 2002), three evaluation indices were selected to represent three key evaluation criteria: water resources condition, economic and social development, and environmental conditions. As the population and area of the countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” vary greatly, the evaluation indices were calculated on either per capita or per unit area bases.
According to internationally and nationally recognized standards, each index is divided into five grades; each grade corresponds to the scores of 1, 1-2, 2-3, 3-4, and 4. See Table 3 for grade classifications.
The definitions of evaluation grades for the indexes of water resources per capita are based on internationally recognized standards. Less than 3000 m3 per capita represents mild water shortage; less than 2000 m3 represents moderate water shortage; less than 1000 m3 represents severe water short-age; and less than 500 m3 represents extreme water shortage.
The definitions of grades for the index of GDP per capita follows the criteria published by The World Bank in 2017.
High-income countries have GDP per capita of more than US$ 12235; middle-income countries have GDP per capita of US$ 3956 to US$ 12235. The definitions of grades for the index of forest coverage is based on the Wikipedia list of the world’s forests (https://www.bk.gugeso.site/).
Table 2 Water resources carrying capacity evaluation index system for countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative
Evaluation criteria Index Index selection basis
Water resources condition Water resources per capita This criterion reflects regional water resources conditions and is a common index for evaluating water resources.
Economic and social development GDP per capita This criterion reflects the economic development and people’s living standards of all countries.
State of ecological environment condition Forest coverage Forest has an important influence on evaporation, precipitation, runoff and other water balance factors, and it reflects the impact of surface storage capacity on water resources.
Table 3 Evaluation grades of water resources carrying capacity indices
Index Evaluation grade
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5
Water resources per capita ≤500 500 - 1000 1000 - 2000 2000 - 3000 > 3000
GDP per capita ≤3956 3956 - 6716 6716 - 9475 9475 - 12 235 > 12 235
Forest coverage ≤15 15 - 30 30 - 45 45 - 60 > 60
A score is calculated for each index as follows:
V1 level index: y=1
V2 level index:$y=1+\frac{(x-{{a}_{1}})}{({{a}_{2}}-{{a}_{1}})}$
V3 level index:$y=2+\frac{(x-{{a}_{1}})}{({{a}_{2}}-{{a}_{1}})}$
V4 level index:$y=3+\frac{(x-{{a}_{1}})}{({{a}_{2}}-{{a}_{1}})}$
V5 level index: y = 4
where, y is the score; x is the value of the index (in m3 inhab-1 yr-1, $ or %); and a1, a2 are the values pertaining to the upper and lower limits of the grade, respectively.
Finally, the score of each index was weighted, and the weights of water resources per capita, GDP per capita and forest coverage rate were 0.2326, 0.4186 and 0.3488, respectively (Wang et al., 2010). The water resources carrying index, WRCI, was then calculated as follows:
$WRCI=\sum\limits_{i=1}^{3}{({{y}_{i}}\times {{w}_{i}}})$
where, yi is the score of the index; wi is the weight of the index; and i is the index number, which is 1 for water resources per capita, 2 for GDP per capita, and 3 for forest coverage.
The WRCI was classified following Zhu et al. (2003) (Table 4), and used to evaluate the water resources carrying conditions of different countries.
Table 4 Classification of water resources carrying index
The bearing state Severely overload Moderately overload Mildly overload Suitably load Fully load
Water resources carrying index 1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4
2.2.2 Analysis of the impact of virtual water on water resources carrying capacity
Through international trade, a country’s net import of virtual
water Sn is calculated as follows (Hoekstra et al., 2012):
Sn(p) = [Ti (p) -Te(p)] × WFprod (p)
where, WFprod (p) is the amount of water consumed by a country to produce product p; Ti(p) is the import volume of product p; and Te(p) is the export volume of product p. When Sn is negative, the country has a net export of water resources through international trade. This increases the gap between the supply and demand of water resources. When Sn is positive, the country has a net import of water resources through international trade. This can effectively compensate for the country’s water resources gap.

2.3 Data

2.3.1 Water resources and socio-economic data
The data sources for the three evaluation indices are shown in Table 5.
2.3.2 Data on the trade of food crops and livestock products
Of the 146 major grain crops included in Mekonnen et al. (2010a), 45 are not cultivated in China and have been excluded from this study. Another six major bulk commodities that are imported and exported by China have been included in this study: palm oil, cotton, sugar, beef, mutton and pork. Therefore, in total, we assessed 107 products, which were divided into 17 major categories: cereals, root and tuber crops, sugar crops, legumes, nuts, oil crops, vegetables, fruits, stimulants, flavor agents, plant fibers, tobacco, rubber, palm oil, cotton, sugar, and livestock products. Data on trade between China and other countries for 2012-2016 were taken from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/).
Table 5 Data sources for the three evaluation indices
Index The data source Year Note
Water resources per capita (m3 in hab-1 yr-1) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/data/query/index.html?Lang=enWebsite) 2014 The missing Montenegro data were obtained from: Meško et al. (2011).
GDP per capita (current US$) The World Bank, World Development Indicators data (https://data.worldbank.org.cn/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD) 2014 Syrian GDP per capita in 2014 is missing, so it was replaced by the 2007 figure.
Forest coverage (% of land area) The World Bank, World Development Indicators data (https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.FRST.ZS?View=chart) 2014 Data refer to the ratio of forest area to the total land area.
2.3.3 Water footprint data
The water footprints of the 107 products were taken from Mekonnen et al. (2010b). Depending on climatic conditions and crop yields, the water footprint of each crop varies from country to country. The water footprints of crops include the green, blue and gray water footprints. Data were available for 1996-2005. Because data were unavailable for years after 2005, we assumed that values remained unchanged after 2005.

3 Results

3.1 Water resources carrying capacity in countries along the “Belt and Road” initiative

Fig. 1 shows the WRCC of the 65 countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative. Palestine and Yemen are the two countries that are severely overloaded. Their water resources per capita, GDP per capita and forest coverage are at the lowest V1 level. Yemen’s water resources per capita, GDP per capita and forest coverage are lower than Palestine’s. Countries at the V1 level are disadvantaged in terms of water resources, economic and social development, and environmental conditions. Their economic development completely exceeds the carrying capacity of regional water resources.
There are 20 countries that are moderately overloaded (Table 6). Of these countries, the ten with the lowest WCRI are Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Afghanistan, India, Tajikistan, Armenia and Iran. For them, at least one evaluation index is at V1, resulting in WRCI of between 1 and 2. Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan’s levels of GDP per capita and forest coverage are at V1, Jordan’s water resources per capita and the level of forest coverage are at V1, India’s GDP per capita is in the V1 level, and the levels of forest coverage at V1 are found in Armenia and Iran. All of these countries are disadvantaged in terms of water resources, economic and social development, and environmental conditions, and regional water resources are unable to support their sustainable development.
Fig. 1 Water resources carrying capacity of 65 countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative

Note: This map is based on the standard map GS(2016)1663 downloaded from the Standard Mapping Service website of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the People’s Republic of China. The base map has no modification.

Table 6 Countries in a moderately overloaded condition
No. Country Level y1 Level y2 Level y3 WRCI
1 Jordan V1 1.00 V2 1.04 V1 1.00 1.017
2 Egypt V2 1.18 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.042
3 Syria V2 1.84 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.195
4 Pakistan V3 2.25 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.291
5 Uzbekistan V3 2.53 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.356
6 Afghanistan V3 2.84 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.428
7 India V3 2.43 V1 1.00 V2 1.59 1.537
8 Tajikistan V4 3.46 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.571
9 Armenia V4 3.65 V2 1.01 V1 1.00 1.623
10 Iran V3 2.69 V2 1.57 V1 1.00 1.633
11 Bangladesh V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.698
12 Kyrgyzstan V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.698
13 Moldova V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V1 1.00 1.698
14 Mongolia V5 4.00 V2 1.08 V1 1.00 1.732
15 Ukraine V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V2 1.11 1.738
16 Maldives V1 1.00 V3 2.85 V1 1.00 1.774
17 Lebanon V2 1.48 V3 2.70 V1 1.00 1.825
18 Nepal V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V2 1.69 1.939
19 Iraq V4 3.35 V2 2.00 V1 1.00 1.963
20 Philippines V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V2 1.85 1.995

Note: y is the score of the index, which is 1 for water resources per capita, 2 for GDP per capita, and 3 for forest coverage.

There are 31 countries that are mildly overloaded (Table 7). Of these countries, the ten with the lowest WCRI are Sri Lanka, Albania, China, Bahrain, Israel, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates. The evaluation indices of these countries are mostly at V1, V2 or V3, or only occasionally at V4 or V5. Among them, Bahrain, Israel, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates have levels of water resources per capita and forest coverage at V1 and the GDP per capita at V5. The water resources per capita of Sri Lanka and Albania are at V4 and V5 levels, while the water resources per capita and GDP per capita of China are at the V3 level. In some of these countries, water resources, economic and social development, and environmental conditions are all at average levels. In other countries, one of these indices may be at a high level, while the other two are at low levels. As a result, the water resources are unable to support sustainable development of the region. However, the overloading of water resources for these countries remains at a manageable level.
Table 7 Countries in mildly overloaded condition
No. Country Level y1 Level y2 Level y3 WRCI
1 Sri Lanka V4 3.53 V1 1.00 V3 2.19 2.005
2 Albania V5 4.00 V2 1.23 V2 1.87 2.097
3 China V3 2.97 V3 2.35 V2 1.49 2.195
4 Bahrain V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
5 Israel V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
6 Kuwait V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
7 Oman V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
8 Qatar V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
9 Saudi Arabia V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
10 United Arab Emirates V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.256
11 Azerbaijan V5 4.00 V3 2.43 V1 1.00 2.295
12 Turkmenistan V5 4.00 V3 2.45 V1 1.00 2.306
13 Myanmar V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V3 2.91 2.364
14 Georgia V5 4.00 V2 1.17 V3 2.71 2.367
15 Thailand V5 4.00 V2 1.72 V3 2.14 2.400
16 Timor-Leste V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V4 3.03 2.404
17 Serbia V5 4.00 V2 1.81 V3 2.07 2.413
18 Singapore V1 1.00 V5 4.00 V2 1.54 2.443
19 Vietnam V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V4 3.20 2.467
20 Macedonia V5 4.00 V2 1.55 V3 2.64 2.499
21 Indonesia V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V4 3.32 2.508
22 Bosnia and Herzegovina V5 4.00 V2 1.45 V3 2.85 2.531
23 Cambodia V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V4 3.52 2.578
24 Bhutan V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V5 4.00 2.744
25 Laos V5 4.00 V1 1.00 V5 4.00 2.744
26 Bulgaria V5 4.00 V3 2.42 V3 2.36 2.764
27 Turkey V4 3.62 V4 3.96 V2 1.02 2.857
28 Kazakhstan V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V1 1.00 2.954
29 Romania V5 4.00 V4 3.20 V3 2.01 2.970
30 Poland V3 2.59 V5 4.00 V3 2.06 2.994
31 Czech Republic V3 2.24 V5 4.00 V3 2.30 2.999

Note: y is the score of the index, which is 1 for water resources per capita, 2 for GDP per capita, and 3 for forest coverage.

There are ten countries that are suitably loaded (Table 8). They are Belarus, Hungary, Montenegro, Croatia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Russia, Estonia, Malaysia and Latvia. At least one evaluation index for each country is at the highest V5 level. Among them, Hungary, Croatia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Russia, Estonia, and Latvia have water resources per capita and GDP per capita at the level of V5, while Montenegro and Malaysia’s level of water resources per capita and forest coverage are at V5, and only water resources per capita is at the V5 level in Belarus. Water resources, economic and social development, and environmental conditions are at relatively high levels in these countries, so their social and economic development levels are commensurate with regional water resources.
Brunei and Slovenia are the only two countries that are fully loaded. All three evaluation indices are at the highest V5 level. Of the two, Brunei’s water resources per capita, GDP per capita and forest coverage are higher than Slovenia’s. Both of these countries are at an advantage in terms of water resources, economic and social development, and environmental conditions. Their water resources can support regional development.

3.2 International trade and virtual water flow

China’s net virtual water import between 2012 and 2016 was calculated using trade and water footprint data. Through the international trade of agricultural and livestock products, China’s annual average net virtual water import was 3.097×1011 m3 yr-1 from 2012 to 2016, and according to the published literature (Mekonnen et al., 2011), China consumes 1.368×1012 m3 yr-1. Therefore, virtual water imports have the potential to improve China’s WRCC.
3.2.1 Net virtual water import through international trade in agricultural and livestock products
The net virtual water imported from agricultural and livestock products increased between 2012 and 2015, and only declined in 2016 (Fig. 2). This trend was mainly determined by changes in the green water footprint, as changes in the blue and grey water amounts were negligible between 2012 and 2016.
Table 9 lists the 15 agricultural and livestock products with the highest annual average net virtual water import values. Soya beans comes first with 2.23 ×1011 m3 yr-1, followed by cotton lint with 1.59 ×1010 m3 yr-1, while palm oil takes the third place with 1.41×1010 m3 yr-1. Net virtual water imports of all other products are below 1×1010 m3 yr-1.
Fig. 3 shows the annual average net virtual water import values for different kinds of agricultural and livestock products between 2012 and 2016. Because of the contribution from soya beans, the annual average net virtual water import of oil plants is the highest, reaching 2.34×1011 m3 yr-1. Cereals come in second, at 2.95 ×1010 m3 yr-1, followed by cotton and palm oil.
3.2.2 Net virtual water import and major trading partners
From the categories with the highest annual average net virtual water import levels, we selected seven key commodities for China: cereal, soya beans, rubber, palm oil, cotton, sugar and livestock products. Cereal products include maize,[wheat and rice, while livestock products include pork, beef and mutton. The top three markets for these 11 key bulk products are shown in Table 10.
Fig. 2 Net virtual water import from major agricultural and livestock products (2012-2016)
Table 8 Countries in suitably loaded condition
No. Country Level y1 Level y2 Level y3 WRCI
1 Belarus V5 4.00 V3 2.58 V3 2.84 3.002
2 Hungary V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V2 1.53 3.137
3 Montenegro V5 4.00 V3 2.24 V5 4.00 3.263
4 Croatia V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V3 2.29 3.404
5 Lithuania V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V3 2.32 3.415
6 Slovakia V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V3 2.69 3.543
7 Russia V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V4 3.32 3.762
8 Estonia V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V4 3.42 3.799
9 Malaysia V5 4.00 V4 3.62 V5 4.00 3.841
10 Latvia V5 4.00 V5 4.00 V4 3.60 3.860

Note: y is the score of the index, which is 1 for water resources per capita, 2 for GDP per capita, and 3 for forest coverage.

Table 9 The 15 agricultural and livestock products with the highest annual average net virtual water import values (2012- 2016)
Ranking The FAO code Agricultural and
livestock products		 Annual average net imported
virtual water (×109 m3 yr-1)
1 236 Soya beans 223.11
2 767 Cotton lint 15.88
3 257 Palm oil 14.09
4 56 Maize 9.22
5 15 Wheat 8.04
6 270 Rapeseed 7.39
7 162 Sugar Raw Centrifugal 6.45
8 83 Sorghum 5.45
9 44 Barely 3.87
10 619 Fruit fresh nes 3.77
11 289 Sesame seed 3.20
12 27 Rice 2.89
13 1035 Meat, pig 2.77
14 836 Natural rubber 2.72
15 187 Peas, dry 2.58
Fig. 3 Annual average net virtual water import of different categories of agricultural and livestock products (2012-2016)
As can be seen from Table 10, cereals are mainly imported from the United States and Australia, while rice is mostly imported from Vietnam and Thailand. Soya beans are mainly imported from Brazil and the United States. Rubber is mostly imported from Thailand and Malaysia. Palm oil is mainly imported from Malaysia and Indonesia. Sugar is mainly from Brazil and Cuba. Cotton imports are from the United States and India. Pork is mainly imported from Germany and Spain.
Therefore, Malaysia, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and Ukraine are the countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative that export key bulk commodities with high net virtual water import values to China.
Table 10 Main source countries and associated net virtual water import values of 11 key bulk products
The FAO
code		 Agricultural and livestock products Net imported virtual water
(×109 m3 yr-1)		 The FAO code Agricultural and livestock products Net imported virtual water
(×109 m3 yr-1)
236 Soya beans 162 Sugar Raw Centrifugal
Brazil 100.12 Brazil 3.95
America 84.94 Cuba 0.73
Argentina 21.40 Thailand 0.50
767 Cotton lint 836 Natural rubber
America 4.18 Thailand 2.48
India 4.04 Malaysia 0.09
Australia 2.73 Viet Nam 0.07
56 Maize 867 Meat, cattle
America 2.27 Uruguay 0.31
Ukraine 2.20 Australia 0.28
Laos 0.12 New Zealand 0.12
15 Wheat 977 Meat, sheep
Australia 2.25 New Zealand 0.59
America 2.17 Australia 0.40
Canada 1.13 Uruguay 0.02
30 Rice 1035 Meat, pig
Viet Nam 1.57 Germany 0.49
Thailand 0.62 Spain 0.39
Pakistan 0.52 America 0.37
257 Oil, palm
Malaysia 6.83
Indonesia 6.72

4 Discussion and conclusions

In this study, we designed a water resources carrying capacity evaluation index system. Weights were assigned to each evaluation index of the system. For each of the 65 countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative, a grade and score were calculated for each evaluation index, which were then combined into a water resources carrying index. The analysis shows that the water resources of more than half of the countries are insufficient to support their economic development. Water resources carrying capacity in countries such as Palestine and Yemen are vastly inadequate. Water resources carrying capacity is also insufficient in China, the initiator of the “Belt and Road” initiative. The use of virtual water provides a new strategy to address the problem of insufficient water resources. Between 2012 and 2016, China’s net virtual water import of 107 major agricultural and livestock products was positive,and it increased by about 26% from 2012 to 2016. The highest annual net virtual water import comes from soybean, followed by cotton and palm oil. Malaysia, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and Ukraine are the countries along the route of the “Belt and Road” initiative that export key products with highest total net virtual water import values to China. Among these six countries, India’s water resources per capita are less than 2000 cubic meters, making it a moderate water shortage country, while the other five countries have water resources per capita of more than 3000 cubic meters, which make them relatively rich in water resources. In the future, China should reduce the cotton trade with India to ease the pressure on India’s water resources. At the same time, it should expand the imports of corn, wheat, rubber and other agricultural products from the other five countries. To make up for the serious shortage of water resources, to optimize the allocation of water resources, and to coordinate economic and social development under the “Belt and Road” initiative, China should increase trade with these countries in the future.

References

Publishing order | Descend order by publishing year | Descend order by cited within
1
Brindha K . 2017. International virtual water flows from agricultural and livestock products of India. Journal of Cleaner Production, 161:922-930.

DOI

2
Cheng G D . 2003. Virtual Water - A strategic instrument to achieve water security. Bulletin of Chinese Academy of Sciences, 4:260-265. (in Chinese)

3
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). 2011. The State of the World’s Land and Water Resources for Food and Agriculture (SOLAW) Managing Systems at Risk. London: The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and Earthscan.

4
Han X . 2012. Analysis and application of flow pattern of virtual water for crops in China. Journal of Economics of Water Resources, 30(6):1-6,69. (in Chinese)

5
Hoekstra A Y, Chapagain A K, Aldaya M M , et al. 2012. The Water Footprint Assessment Manual-Setting the Global standard method. Translated by Liu J G, Zeng Z, Zhao Q B, et al. Beijing: Science Press. (in Chinese)

6
Hoekstra A Y . 2003. Virtual Water Trade: Proceedings of the International Expert Meeting on Virtual Water Trade, Value of Water Research Report Series No.12. The Netherlands: UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education.

7
Hui Y H, Jiang X H, Huang Q , et al. 2001. Research on evaluation index system of water resources bearing capacity. Bulletin of Soil and Water Conservation, 1:30-34. (in Chinese)

8
Lamastra L, Miglietta P P, Toma P , et al. 2017. Virtual water trade of agri- food products: Evidence from italian-chinese relations. Science of The Total Environment, 599- 600:474-482.

DOI PMID

9
Loucks D P . 2000. Sustainable water resources management. International Water Resources Association, 25(1):3-10.

DOI PMID

10
Ma C, Xu C X, Tian G L . 2011. The virtual water flow in China’s foreign trade of agricultural products. Resources Science, 33(4):729-735. (in Chinese)

11
Mekonnen M M, Hoekstra A Y . 2010 a. The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Crops and Derived Crop Products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.47. The Netherlands: UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education.

12
Mekonnen M M, Hoekstra A Y . 2010 b. The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Farm Animals and Animal Products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48. The Netherlands: UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education.

13
Mekonnen M M, Hoekstra A Y . 2011. National Water Footprint Accounts: The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Production and Consumption, Value of Water Research Report Series No. 50. The Netherlands: UNESCO- IHE Institute for Water Education.

14
Meško G, Dimitrijević D, Fields C B . 2011. Understanding and Managing Threats to the Environment in South Eastern Europe. The Netherlands: Springer.

15
Mubako S T . 2011. Frameworks for Estimating Virtual Water Flows Among U.S. States. PhD diss., Southern Illinois University Carbondale.

16
National development and reform commission, the ministry of foreign affairs, the ministry of commerce. 2015. Vision and proposed actions outlined on jointly building Silk Road Economic Belt and 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road. Finance & Accounting for Communications, 4:82-87. (in Chinese)

DOI PMID

17
Novo P, Garrido A, Varela-Ortega C . 2009. Are virtual water flows in Spanish grain trade consistent with relative water scarcity. Ecological Economics, 68(5):1454-1464.

DOI

18
Ruan B Q, Shen J . 1998. Calculating model for moderately bearing capacity of regional water resources. Journal of Soil Erosion and Soil and Water Conservation, 3:58-62,86. (in Chinese)

19
Wang Y J, Yang G, Xu H L . 2010. Evaluation of water resources carrying capacity based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation on river basin in Arid Zone. Advanced Materials Research, 113- 116:488-494.

20
Water Conservancy Bureau of Hydrology. 1987. Water Resources Ministry of China Evaluation. Beijing: China Water & Power Press. (in Chinese)

21
Wei S J, He P . 2015. Analysis and enlightenment of virtual water trade of Chinese and Asean agricultural products. International Business, 12:36-42. (in Chinese)

22
World Water Assessment Programme (WWAP). 2019. Leaving No One Behind: The United Nations World Water Development Report. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

23
Wu S H, Liu L L, Liu Y H , et al. 2018. Geographical patterns and environmental change risks in terrestrial areas of the “Belt and Road”. Acta Geographica Sinica, 73(7):1214-1225. (in Chinese)

DOI

24
Xia J, Zhu Y Z , 2002. The measurement of water resources security: A study and challenge on water resources carrying capacity. Journal of Natural Resources, 17(3):262-269. (in Chinese)

DOI

25
Xu Y P . 1993. A study of comprehensive evaluation of the water resource carrying capacity in the arid area—A case study in the Hetian river basin of Xinjiang. Journal of Natural Resources, 8(3):229-237. (in Chinese)

DOI

26
Zhang J H, Li J, Tang Y . 2012. Analysis of the spatio-temporal matching of water resource and economic development factors in China. Resources Science, 34(8):1546-1555. (in Chinese)

27
Zhu Y X, Huang Y X, Wang L J . 2002. Synthetical evaluating method of water resources sustainable development and using status. Journal of Jilin University (Earth Science Edition), 32(1):55-57. (in Chinese)

28
Zhu Y Z, Xia J, Tan G . 2003. Measurement and evaluation of water resources carrying capacity of northwest China. Resources Science, 25(4):43-48. (in Chinese)

29
Zuo Q T, Hao L G, Liu J H , et al. 2018. Characteristics of water resources in “Belt and Road” district and its framework of water security system. Water Resources Protection, 34(4):16-21, 28. (in Chinese)

30
Zuo Q T, Zhang P J, Ma J X . 2004. Calculating model and key questions about carrying capacity of water resources. Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering, 35(2):5-8, 11-94. (in Chinese)

Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉