With the quantity and quality of water diminishing globally (here, here, and, from a conservative think-tank, here) the likelihood of conflict grows. For global manufacturers that means increased environmental risks. To reduce their risks some companies, like blue-jean king Levi Strauss & Company, have started reducing their water consumption through stone-washing jeans with, well, stones, but not water. Considering the average pair of jeans uses roughly 900 gallons of water from cotton boll to garbage bin, there appears to be plenty of room to reduce water use. The problem facing global manufacturers is significant enough that the United Nations set up an entire program to help industry recognize their impact on and susceptibility to fresh, reliable water supplies. Current signatories include Nike, Coca-Cola, Danone, Nestle, and Levi Strauss. (To see which companies are delinquent, click here (spoiler: none of the aforementioned are delinquent).)
With the growing environmental risk of reduced water quality and quantity, what are some tools responsible businesses can use to limit their exposure to that risk, enhance local access to fresh, reliable water sources, and maintain commercial competitiveness? The UN’s CEO Water Mandate program is a good place to start. It offers tools for businesses to assess their water risk, to research on the link between water and climate change, and to see what other businesses are doing. Another useful tool that recently came into being is the Ceres Aqua Gauge. While mainly focused on giving investors a way “to assess, scorecard and compare companies on their management of water risk,” it would be a bold manufacturer that did not think it wise to see what their investors see regarding water risk. Finally, World Resources Institute recently launched Aqueduct to map water risks from the local to the global. Aqueduct smartly creates an overall water risk number by looking at three different categories: water quality, water quantity, and political risk (regulations and reputation).
Well of life
Smart manufacturers understand the value of water notwithstanding that in so many parts of the world it is poorly priced, if at all. At one point that paradox of value might have held water. But growing population, climate, industrial, and agricultural pressures increase the value of fresh, reliable water. Better to find ways to reduce water-associated risks than to find out what measures desperate people are willing to take to protect an absolute necessity.
