The U.S. food-energy-water system: A blueprint to fill the mesoscale gap for science and decision-making

Abstract

Food, energy, and water (FEW) are interdependent and must be examined as a coupled natural-human system. This perspective essay defines FEW systems and outlines key findings about them as a blueprint for future models to satisfy six key objectives. The first three focus on linking the FEW production and consumption to impacts on Earth cycles in a spatially specific manner in order to diagnose problems and identify potential solutions. The second three focus on describing the evolution of FEW systems to identify risks, thus empowering the FEW actors to better achieve the goals of resilience and sustainability. Four key findings about the FEW systems that guide future model development are (1) that they engage ecological, carbon, water, and nutrient cycles most powerfully among all human systems; (2) that they operate primarily at a mesoscale best captured by counties, districts, and cities; (3) that cities are hubs within the FEW system; and (4) that the FEW system forms a complex network.

Keywords: Environmental footprints; Food–energy–water nexus; Network analysis; Urban ecology.

Fig. 1

Diagram of core food–energy–water (FEW) system elements. This example is for a livestock-based food production system. Note that footprint analysis is integrated along the full supply chain

Fig. 2

Diagram of how food–energy–water (FEW) systems are embedded within the broader ecological-economy. Note that FEW systems are important for ecosystem services

Fig. 3

a Comparison of internal versus external blue virtual water transfers at the county, metro area, and the state scale. Distribution of net blue virtual water balances for b the U.S. states, and c counties

Fig. 4

Virtual water flows into Flagstaff, AZ Reproduced with permission from Rushforth and Ruddell (2016)

Fig. 5

Network representation of a food flows and b virtual water flows within the 50 U.S. states. The states are ranked according to the total trade volume and plotted clockwise in descending order. The size of the outer bar indicates the total trade volume of each state. Export volume is indicated with links emanating from the outer bar of the same color. Import volume is indicated with a white area separating the outer bar from links of a different color. Reproduced with permission from a Lin et al. (2014), b Dang et al. (2014)

Fig. 6

Example of a data visualization framework that can be used to convey monthly information on FEW system elements at the county scale to a broad section of decision makers and the general public