Corporate Water Accounting: An Analysis of Methods and Tools for ...

20
SABMILLER AND WATER FOOTPRINTING
In 2008 and 2009, SABMiller—a South Africa brewing company—conducted
water footprints of its South African and Czech operations. These
two locations were selected due to their large volume of product and
because they are both in water stressed regions. This analysis allowed
SABMiller to identify geographic locations and production stages with
particularly high water use, and also to compare these very different
supply chains to understand how their mitigation strategy might differ
depending on location.
These two analyses demonstrated important differences in SABMiller’s
water use in different locations. The studies estimated that it takes 155
liters of water to produce one liter of beer in South Africa, while it takes
only 45 liters to produce the same amount of beer in the Czech Republic.
The analysis revealed that this discrepancy is not due primarily to different
production efficiencies, but rather climatic differences, the amount
of imported crops, and packaging. For instance, whereas the Czech
operations import about 5% of their crops, the South Africa operations
import 31% of their total crops mainly from the United States, Argentina,
and Australia. Further, blue water comprised about 34% of water
use in South Africa, but only 6% in the Czech Republic, which instead
was heavily reliant upon green water for grain production. This does not
ultimately change the total water footprint, but does have significant
implications in terms of the impacts of that water use and potential risks
due to competition and scarcity. The vast majority of water use (over
90%) in both locations occurred in the crop cultivation stage. Even within
the individual countries, the study found significant regional differences.
In the some parts of South Africa, barley and maize production relied
on irrigation/blue water for 90% of their water consumption. In others,
those same crops were grown using only green water.
These studies have helped shape SABMiller’s sustainability strategy
for the future. For instance, in South Africa, the company is piloting its
“water neutral” concept in two regions identified as posing particular
water-related risks. Furthermore, after identifying that agricultural
water use is the greatest area of water intensity, the company has been
looking into toolkits for sustainable agricultural practices and is employing
agricultural extension workers to improve yield management and
water efficiency.
understand their indirect water use (i.e., the
water embedded in their supply chains) and
because of the global reach of most corporations’
value chains.
Scope, structure, and outputs
Water footprinting focuses solely on providing
a method for companies to measure their
water use and discharge; within the context
of the Water Footprint Network, the WF itself
does not aim to assess the status of watersheds
or water-related impacts per se. A WF captures
the volume, location, and timing of water uses
and discharges. WFs are divided into three
separate components—the blue, green, and
gray—all of which are expressed in terms of
water volume. These components are meant to
be considered both separately and together as
a total WF (i.e., the sum of the blue, green, and
gray water footprints). The three WF components
are defined as follows:
• Blue water – the volume of consumptive
water use taken from surface waters and
aquifers.
• Green water – the volume of evaporative
flows (found in soils rather than major bodies
of water) used.
• Gray water – the theoretical volume of
water needed to dilute pollutants discharged
to water bodies to the extent that
they do not exceed minimum regulatory
standards.
The green and blue components of a WF
focus on consumptive water use (i.e., the
volume of water removed from local water
system by evaporation, inclusion in a product,
water transfer, or otherwise). They do not
include those uses of water that are eventually
returned to the same system from which
they are withdrawn (i.e., non-consumptive
uses). To the degree to which non-consumptive
water use is addressed, it is done within
the gray water component.
A WF as described above is only one component
of a larger water footprint assessment.
A WF is purely a volumetric account of water
appropriation. A broader WF assessment
looks at the sustainability of that appropriation
and steps that can be taken to make it
more sustainable. A full water footprint assessment
is divided into four stages:
• Setting goals and scope
• WF accounting (the traditional
“water footprint”)
• WF sustainability assessment
• WF response formulation
The first phase sets the boundaries of the assessment.
The second phase is the traditional
water footprint where water uses are measured
by volume. The third phase is essentially
an impact assessment where water use
is compared with local water availability data.
In the final stage, response options such as
strategies, targets, or policies are formulated.
The “water footprint” and “water footprint assessment”
terminology is the source of some