The number of publications on environmental footprint indicators has been growing rapidly, but with limited efforts to integrate different footprints into a coherent framework. Such integration is important for comprehensive understanding of environmental issues, policy formulation and assessment of trade-offs between different environmental concerns. Here, we systematize published footprint studies and define a family of footprints that can be used for the assessment of environmental sustainability. We identify overlaps between different footprints and analyse how they relate to the nine planetary boundaries and visualize the crucial information they provide for local and planetary sustainability. In addition, we assess how the footprint family delivers on measuring progress towards Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), considering its ability to quantify environmental pressures along the supply chain and relating them to the water-energy-food-ecosystem (WEFE) nexus and ecosystem services. We argue that the footprint family is a flexible framework where particular members can be included or excluded according to the context or area of concern. Our paper is based upon a recent workshop bringing together global leading experts on existing environmental footprint indicators.

Target 6.4 of the recently adopted Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) deals with the reduction of water scarcity. To monitor progress towards this target, two indicators are used: Indicator 6.4.1 measuring water use efficiency and 6.4.2 measuring the level of water stress (WS). This paper aims to identify whether the currently proposed indicator 6.4.2 considers the different elements that need to be accounted for in a WS indicator. WS indicators compare water use with water availability. We identify seven essential elements: 1) both gross and net water abstraction (or withdrawal) provide important information to understand WS; 2) WS indicators need to incorporate environmental flow requirements (EFR); 3) temporal and 4) spatial disaggregation is required in a WS assessment; 5) both renewable surface water and groundwater resources, including their interaction, need to be accounted for as renewable water availability; 6) alternative available water resources need to be accounted for as well, like fossil groundwater and desalinated water; 7) WS indicators need to account for water storage in reservoirs, water recycling and managed aquifer recharge. Indicator 6.4.2 considers many of these elements, but there is need for improvement. It is recommended that WS is measured based on net abstraction as well, in addition to currently only measuring WS based on gross abstraction. It does incorporate EFR. Temporal and spatial disaggregation is indeed defined as a goal in more advanced monitoring levels, in which it is also called for a differentiation between surface and groundwater resources. However, regarding element 6 and 7 there are some shortcomings for which we provide recommendations. In addition, indicator 6.4.2 is only one indicator, which monitors blue WS, but does not give information on green or green-blue water scarcity or on water quality. Within the SDG indicator framework, some of these topics are covered with other indicators.

The Indus basin is one of the regions in the world that is faced with major challenges for its water sector, due to population growth, rapid urbanisation and industrialisation, environmental degradation, unregulated utilization of the resources, inefficient water use and poverty, all aggravated by climate change. The Indus Basin is shared by 4 countries – Pakistan, India, Afghanistan and China. With a current population of 237 million people which is projected to increase to 319 million in 2025 and 383 million in 2050, already today water resources are abstracted almost entirely (more than 95% for irrigation). Climate change will result in increased water availability in the short term. However in the long term water availability will decrease. Some current aspects in the basin need to be re-evaluated. During the past decades water abstractions – and especially groundwater extractions – have augmented continuously to support a rice-wheat system where rice is grown during the kharif (wet, summer) season (as well as sugar cane, cotton, maize and other crops) and wheat during the rabi (dry, winter) season. However, the sustainability of this system in its current form is questionable. Additional water for domestic and industrial purposes is required for the future and should be made available by a reduction in irrigation requirements. This paper gives a comprehensive listing and description of available options for current and future sustainable water resources management (WRM) within the basin. Sustainable WRM practices include both water supply management and water demand management options. Water supply management options include: (1) reservoir management as the basin is characterised by a strong seasonal behaviour in water availability (monsoon and meltwater) and water demands; (2) water quality conservation and investment in wastewater infrastructure; (3) the use of alternative water resources like the recycling of wastewater and desalination; (4) land use planning and soil conservation as well as flood management, with a focus on the reduction of erosion and resulting sedimentation as well as the restoration of ecosystem services like wetlands and natural floodplains. Water demand management options include: (1) the management of conjunctive use of surface and groundwater; as well as (2) the rehabilitation and modernization of existing infrastructure. Other demand management options are: (3) the increase of water productivity for agriculture; (4) crop planning and diversification including the critical assessment of agricultural export, especially (basmati) rice; (5) economic instruments and (6) changing food demand patterns and limiting post-harvest losses.