International Trade in Resources: a Biophysical Assessment, Report of the International Resource Panel

www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] web: www.unep.org International Trade in Resources A biophysical assessment r o g r a m m e P n v i r o n m e n t E

a t i o n s N

n i t e d U Acknowledgements

This report has been produced for the UNEP-hosted International Resource Panel (IRP). It is the result of the efforts of several expert members of the IRP as well as the external expertise of Marina Fischer-Kowalski, Monika Dittrich, Nina Eisenmenger, Paul Ekins, Julian Fulton, Thomas Kastner, Karin Hosking, Heinz Schandl, Jim West, and Thomas O. Wiedmann. We would like to thank all for their invaluable contributions.

We would also like to thank those that provided their valuable time in carrying out the external peer review of the report: Vangelis Vitalis, Heike Baumueller, Jan Weinzettel, Dabo Guan, Kuishuang Feng, and Chen Hin Keong. Special thanks to Julia Kolar of Institute for Social Ecology at University of Klagenfurt in Austria for essential support in data verification.

We would also like to extend our thanks to International Resource Panel member Edgar G. Hertwich, who acted as Peer Review Coordinator for this report.

The UNEP Secretariat Team provided essential support, especially Shaoyi Li, Madhuvantthe, Christina Bodouroglou and Abraham Pedroza.

Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2015 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or nonprofit purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made.

UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme.

Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision or the stated policy of the United Nations Environment Programme, nor does citing of trade names or commercial processes constitute endorsement.

The full report should be referenced as follows: UNEP (2015), International Trade in Resources: A Biophysical Assessment, Report of the International Resource Panel.

Design & Layout: Marie Moncet at Sourible; Printing: CLD, UNESCO, France Cover photos ©: Sludge G, flickr; Sajid Pervaiz Fazal, flickr; Vicky johnson, freeimages; Derell Licht, flickr; Han Jun Zeng, flickr. UNEP ISBN (Full Report): 978-92-807-3486-7 promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. This publication is printed on 100% recycled paper, using vegetable -based inks and other eco-friendly practices. Our distribution policy aims to reduce UNEP’s carbon footprint. www.unep.org United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 Fax: (254 20) 7623927 E-mail: [email protected] web: www.unep.org

UNEP Trade Report International Trade in Resources

A biophysical assessment

Produced by the International Resource Panel

Prepared by Marina Fischer-Kowalski, Monika Dittrich, Nina Eisenmenger, Paul Ekins, Julian Fulton, Thomas Kastner, Karin Hosking, Heinz Schandl, Jim West, Thomas O. Wiedmann

‘Draft design of Final Report for Launch Event Only’ International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

4 Preface of upstream resource requirements; as well as the implications of trade for global resource efficiency. efficiency. resource global for of trade implications the as well as requirements; resource of upstream composition and magnitude the dependency; of trade distribution and to degree the relating of questions to aseries answers to provide so, seek they doing In environment. and trade between inter-relationship complex of the understanding to aid hope authors the topic, the on literature existing the reviewing By of trade. effects ecological the for aproxy as function and commodities, of traded chain production the along used land energy, and water to materials, the refer These trade. international of requirements’’ resource on the ‘‘upstream evidence scientific latest of the synthesis a comprehensive provides It of trade. impacts environmental of the size and location nature, the on knowledge to enhance aim the with Impacts, Environmental on Group IRP’s by the Working prepared was report particular The emissions. and of wastes amount asmaller generates and resources fewer requires production their where countries from to obtained be commodities allows trade not or whether assess to seek report of the authors the viewpoint, economic) an (versus abiophysical from trade examining By of demand. to locations the of supply locations geographical the from resources distributing A biophysical assessment ‘‘ entitled report In this efficiency. resource global for implications its and system trading to world the attention its turns (IRP) Panel Resource UNEP’s International world’s of the resources, management to how improve on knowledge sharing and Tasked building with nations. exporting to low-income importing high-income from activities processing and to extraction related problems environmental shifting by concerns, distributional Trade raises also standpoint. environmental an from worrisome is which consumption and production global raising on has it impact corresponding the However, precisely is it resources. of natural to supply the limits localised overcoming in indispensable is trade Increased prosperous global population. more and of agrowing needs the to meet order in doubled than more of trade volume the six-fold and than more 1980 2010 increased and of trade Between value the resources. for demand increasing rapidly and liberalisation by progressive fuelled decades, past over vastly expanded has trade World ’’, the IRP examines how efficient the current system of world trade is in is trade of world system current the ’’, efficient how examines IRP the International Trade in Resources: Trade Resources: in International Preface Dr. Khosla, Ashok objectives. environmental of support in policies trade craft and of trade consequences environmental negative the tackle to help by policy-makers required knowledge provides It scarcity. resource and sustainability environmental for trade of global implications the on light sheds that assessment policy-relevant authoritative, an presents It efficiency. resource and use resource on to discussions the contributes report the whole, the On trade. international through resources of allocation efficient environmentally more apotentially prevent which factors other likely are there that means decades, recent in over-proportionally to rising be shown been have requirements Yet, upstream that fact the inconclusive. remains answer the use, resource global of efficiency the worsens or improves trade international of whether question central the for As pronounced. more much becomes countries developing and countries developed between use resource in difference the as exchange, of unequal patterns accentuates trade in embodied resources upstream for accounting instance, For drawn. be can traded materials, depending on methodology and resource. Nevertheless, some common conclusions of cent per to 40 400 widely, from range land and water materials, of upstream Estimates involved. to difficulties the attention draws report the requirements, resource upstream to estimating regards With producers. resource fewer ever on relies balance its as system, trading global of the vulnerability heightened the highlights study The New Delhi, India India Delhi, New

International Resource Resource International September 2015 Co-Chairs, Panel (IRP) Panel Ljubljana, Republic of Slovenia Poto Dr. Janez International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment č nik, nik, 5 Preface International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

6 Foreword Likewise, domestic efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions in one country may be negated by negated be may country one in emissions gas greenhouse to curb efforts domestic Likewise, pollution. water and degradation land of biodiversity, loss waste, emissions, increasing while assets, natural depletes export for of resources processing and extraction The countries. exporting populated sparsely more and to low-income countries importing populated densely and high-income from burden environmental the shifts Trade typically apparent. more are impacts distributional its use, of resource efficiency global the or worsens improves trade as whether to conclusion definitive no is there Although processes. production and extraction with associated benefits environmental and efficiency resource potential any to offset likely are factors these that concludes It productivity. diminishing with land from population agrowing to feed need the and grades ore metal declining goods, of high-processed trade the in share agreater levels, trade in increase to ageneral due requirements upstream rising of the evidence provides report the decades, three past the over back Looking goods are exported. the once behind left emissions and waste the and of origin country the in consumed resources additional of the account takes it because useful is approach This production. or of extraction point the at used land energy, and water materials, as such requirements upstream on focuses it resources, of natural trade international in the trends examining While understanding. to this contribution asignificant makes “ flows. trade in surge recent the given particularly trade-offs, minimize and synergies maximize can that policy to shape needed is involved interactions complex of the understanding Abetter ambiguous. more are impacts environmental their but evident, are choice and competition efficiency, cost production, increased as such Benefits domestically. affordable or available not are that resources for demand rising to meet countries permitting prosperity, and growth of economic enabler important an as recognized been long has trade International assessment” Abiophysical Trade Resources: in International Foreword technologies and goods. green to access and management resource production, efficient through benefits, environmental and trade both increase can that framework policy asupportive to develop seeking anyone for knowledge essential provides it report, of the scope the beyond is analysis policy explicit while Therefore, allowances for domestic firms. emissions free and subsidies and mechanisms, adjustment border agreements, trade regional or bilateral policies, by clear limited be can environment the on impacts However, damaging such reduce emissions. to commitments legal weak with to countries investments, transferring and from, imports increasing International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment UN Under-Secretary-General UNEP Executive Director Executive UNEP Achim Steiner Achim 7 Foreword

commodities of traded requirements resource Upstream 3. commodities and Trade2. resources in Introduction 1. Foreword Preface Acknowledgements References Conclusions5. impacts environmental their and Trade4. resource of type flows by

are new patterns emerging? emerging? patterns new are or levels, income with scaling still market world the of organization the 2.3 Is economy world the in demanders and Suppliers 2.2 trade of importance the 2.1 them with and growing are Trade volumes report the of structure and 1.3 Scope consumptionextraction, and deposition processing, resource of cycle life the of representation physical and 1.2 monetary The prices rising and shortages supply potential demand, resource growing rapidly 1.1 context: world economic The requirements upstream and fuels Trade4.3 fossil in requirements upstream and trade Metals 4.2 land-use including requirements, upstream and 4.1 trade Biomass commodities traded of requirements upstream on Conclusions 3.5 trade in 3.4 Water embodied perspective cycle alife from requirements material Upstream 3.3 IO approaches hybrid or IO Single-Region approaches using studies national from findings requirements: material Upstream 3.2 using an environmentally Input-Output (MRIO) approach extended Multi-Regional studies from findings trade: international of requirements 3.1 material Upstream

International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Content 104 91 69 44 36 54 48 82 46 42 25 57 27 16 19 15 6 4 2 9 Content International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

10 Content

18. 17. 2.2 2.1 16. 15. 14. 13. 12. 11. 10. 9. 8. 7. 6. 5. 4. 3. 2. 1. 29. 28. 27. 26. resources 25. 24. 23. 22. 21. 20. 19.

ste ofste figures CREEA and Eora from results footprint material of A comparison (2010), terms balances absolute trade physical and (2005) wealth Natural Physical of trade 2010 countries, balances along income lines grouped physicalThe countries trade between 2010 1980 and terms, monetary versus physical in trade in groups commodity of Shares Trade in biomass by main sub-category, 1980–2010 sub-category, by main Trade biomass in (1995–1999) world the in countries all for scarcity water versus Water dependency region MENA the in availability and use water of Estimates 1962–2010 trade, with associated use material upstream and trade Direct tonnes million in (2003) USA the and economies American Latin for (PTB) balances trade physical and (RTB) balances trade material Raw (RTB) balance trade material raw and (PTB) balance trade EU27 physical density by population 2005, 1995 and in world the of rest the and countries OECD between balances trade material Raw Physical group by according to trade balances country population density 2008 1980 in and dependence resource of distribution Geographical 1996–2005 period over the products industrial and agricultural in trade to related flows water virtual gross of direction and country per balance water Virtual commodities traded of category by material requirements material Upstream Austria and Republic Czech the Germany, for (RTB) balances trade material raw and (PTB) balances trade Physical (2010) region by world footprints ’bad labour’ selected and footprint Employment (2008) consumption domestic all for required labour to the relative imports in embodied labour and workforce, domestic to their relative exports countries‘ in embodied Labour 1980–2010 group, by income balances trade physical Countries’ andPersistence in change net-importing and net-exporting 1962–2010 countries, 2010 composition, by material importers and exporters net Largest 2010 category, by material continents of balances trade Physical 1980–2010 terms, (right) monetary and (left) physical in by continents Trade balance 1970 region, 2010 by world and exports and imports extraction, Resource 1980–2010 composition, to material according trade Physical 1980–2010 consumption, GDP, and population, extraction trade, in Dynamics production, consumptionacross and deposition extraction, from cycle life aproduct along added value and wastes use, Material beyond and century twentieth the throughout prices material Raw regions world six the between flows water Virtual water available capita per versus import cereal net capita per in change of Patterns

44 43 43 34 39 39 54 38 45 33 35 46 50 49 32 29 59 26 52 28 25 27 37 37 31 31 47 47 15 51 17

62. 61. 60. 59. 58. 57. 56. 55. 54. 53. 52. 51. 50. 49. 48. 47. 46. 45. 44. 43. 42. 41. 40. 39. 38. 37. consumption 36. 35. 34. 33. 32. 31. 30.

tons) (million 2008 in petroleum and gas natural coal, of importers and Top exporters ten to related flows water virtual gross of direction and country per balance water Virtual 2010 processing, of by degree goods metal traded of Composition 1996–2005 period over the products industrial and agricultural in trade 1980–2010 group, by income (PTB) balances trade physical Countries’ tonnes million 1970–2008, regions, 5world for fuels fossil for balances trade Physical tonnes million in 2008, in gas natural of importers and exporters Largest 2008 tons, million oil, crude and gas natural –coal, fuels fossil of producers Largest 2005 by country, trade metal Germany’s of requirements material the and metals in trade direct Germany’s tonnes million in 2008, in oil crude of importers and exporters Largest 2008 by continent, goods Trade metal of Persistence andPersistence in change net-importing and net-exporting 1962–2010 countries, Top 10 net suppliers and net importers of metals in the year 2010 year the in metals of importers net Top and 10 suppliers net Trading (products): biomass top 10 net-importing and net-exporting countries tonnes million in (RTB) balance trade material raw and (PTB) balance trade EU27 physical density) low, is LD and population high, is (HD density by population 2005, 1995 and world the of rest the and countries OECD between (RTB) balances trade material Raw worldGlobal trade by countries’ income group 1990-2010 1980–2010 terms, (right) monetary and (left) physical in by continent Trade balances 1980–2010 composition, to material according trade Physical tonnes million in 2008, in coal of importers and exporters Largest 1970–2008 tons, million fuels, fossil of extraction Global 2005 1995 group, and by country minerals industrial and metals of RTB tradeMetal according to and development population density status 2010year the (10 countries) in metals of importers net main (10 and countries) suppliers net Main 1980–2010 terms, physical and monetary in processing of by degree Trade metals in and extraction trade, metal Global 1980–2010 metals of grades ore declining The to anation’s linked HANPP embodied and anation’s on territory HANPP between Ratio land embodied of EU terms in the of Trade balance 10 world for regions 2000 in area cropland versus cultivation cereal for suitable Land 2000 year the for regions world across potential land and resources land of Distribution 2000 year the for regions world across resources land of Distribution Physical trade of biomass the top 10 net-importing and net-exporting countries 2008 by continent, countries, between trade commodity Biomass-based

International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

100 100 101 96 60 66 99 64 64 68 86 86 84 88 98 93 93 85 95 92 73 73 72 67 78 70 87 61 97 76 75 71 74 11 Content International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

12 Content

Credit: Neil Kremer, flickr 1. Introduction

The availability and quality of natural resources such as energy, materials, water and land are essential to human well-being and sustenance. The uneven distribution of these resources, owing to geological or climatic factors among others, has traditionally led to human settlements in geographies where the required resources were plentiful and accessible. If resources were plentiful, the settlement process created population centres, which often turned into industrial regimes dependent on the immediate natural 1. Introduction environment of resources. The resulting depletion in local availability created a demand for resources from peripheral territories. This pattern holds for renewable resources (e.g. forests, drinking water and food crops) and even more so for non-renewable resources (such as silver, copper, iron, coal and petroleum), which play a central role in the later stages of development. In physical terms, therefore, there is an inevitable asymmetry between population centres and peripheries: peripheries extract raw materials from nature and process them to a certain degree for their own consumption, on the one hand, and for use by the centres on the other. Centres have few raw materials to extract, but they process the extracted raw materials further and consume them, and deliver manufactured products to the peripheries. Historically, urban centres have specialized in commodities for which resources were easily accessible within their peripheries, and exchanged them, through trade, for specialized commodities from other centres (Pomeranz and Topik, 2006).

The evolution of international trade has facilitated gaining prominence as a determinant. Resource the transfer of resources from the centres of and environmental efficiency is about the supply to the centres of demand. But how relationship between the amount of resources and efficient is the current system of world trade environmental impacts and a certain service: the in distributing resources? Often, economic fewer the resources and environmental impacts, efficiency, determined by the relationship between the more efficient the service is. The indicators monetary costs and benefits, is used to measure that give insights into economic efficiency the efficiency of world trade. In recent times, are monetary. The indicators of resource and however, resource and environmental efficiency is environmental efficiency are physical, with the

13 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

14 1. Introduction 3. 2. 1. as: such questions trade, world in changes of and to structure the pertaining related, of additional questions, which may be closely number on a focus also will report this efficiency, resource from apart Thus, generations. of future respect in or countries, between or within issues distributional address cannot itself by efficiency and remain supply to limits but efficiently, used be should resources that desirable clearly is It and supply balancing and demand. shortages way of overcoming local and regional supply one is trade world Increasing demonstrate. will significantly in thefuture, as our assessment to set escalate is demand visible, become of resources of anumber to supply the limits environmental and economic as Even to diverge. other, the on continue will hand, and resource and environmental efficiency, agendas for economic efficiency, on the one the costs, external as considered are issues environmental and However, resource as long as into account. taken are use and extraction resource with associated losses and burdens environmental the which in transfers resource to rise gives trade international internalized, are exerted.Theoreticallyis produced where the least environmental pressure were commodities and extracted were resources if efficient resource considered be would trade international perspective, global a From efficiency. environmental more efficiency thanon economic and resource on focuses report This methods. related (LCA) and assessment cycle life by (MFA), latter the and analysis flow of material by means measured being often former

for resources? How do these factors vary vary factors these do How resources? for of supply locations the are where and demand, and of use centres the are where organized, market world the in roles the are How time? over change they do how and composed they are how requirements, these are large How commodities? of traded water, energy, and of materials, land, terms in requirements, resource upstream the are What time? over change and resources between vary it does how and distributed, dependency trade is How resources? with countries supplying for trade is important How , insofar as external costs costs external as , insofar reliable results. results. reliable fully yield to harmonized sufficiently are methods before time some take will it used; model MRIO the background assumptions made and the on strongly depends still calculations of these al. et 2014; Schaffartzik 2014; Owen, and Wood, (Inomata and Moran demonstrated have assessments comparative As 2014; Tukker al. et Wiedmann, and Hoekstra (see characterized be to exports, and imports respective to produce used flows upstream the including countries, of individual levels water,or consumption land) or (or carbon, material the allow and emerged have footprint” “water and footprint” “material as such indicators New inputs. required of the of origin regions flows to the trade international through to traced be consumption material national regional input-output models (MRIOs) allow multi- extended of environmentally a number flows is expanding rapidly,since particularly physical on trade-related literature scientific The et al., 2011). a biophysical perspective (Fischer-Kowalski from issues explored has (IRP) Panel Resource UNEP, 2013; 2014a), Bank, World International the al. et (Dobbs perspective economic an from trade international on reports and of assessments number the in rise rapid However, the given perspectives. monetary and problems will to need build on both biophysical environmental and resource to global solutions finding and intertwined, are trade international The economic and biophysical perspectives of et al. Schoer et 2009; Lenzen al. et Peters, and 2010; Bringezu, and Hertwich Dittrich al. et (e.g. Bruckner vein this in work earlier applying and developing on, building and trade, of international dimension biophysical the exploring and stressing track, UNCTAD, adifferent 2013). pursues report This and implications tend to predominate (e.g. analysis economic which in perspectives, of different anumber from approached been, have indeed be, and may questions These change over time? over change they way do what in and resources, between , 2012; al. et Steen-Olsen , 2014; al. et Wiedmann , 2013; al. et Muñoz , 2012; al. et Dittrich , 2014a), outcome the , 2013; al. et Lee , 2012). , 2009; , 2009; , 2012; , 2013; , 2013)., International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

In this context, our report seeks to assess the materials, water and land, we begin with a sketch existing (and often very recent) literature for an of the changed economic context, and then overview of approaches and findings, and to briefly explain why the observation of physical help answer certain questions outlined in this flows delivers specific insights different from Introduction. As it will focus on physical trade those obtained from the more common types of flows, such as direct flows and upstream flows of economic analysis.

1.1 The economic world context: rapidly growing resource demand, potential supply shortages and rising prices

As shown in a previous report Decoupling natural extraction coincides with a change in the price resource use and environmental impacts from system: the prices of natural resources steadily economic growth (UNEP et al., 2011), the global declined in the twentieth century; however, the use of natural resources has risen substantially, price increments since the beginning of the particularly since the start of the twenty-first twenty-first century have more than compensated century. The accelerated rate of resource for the centennial decline (Figure 1).

Raw material prices throughout the twentieth century and beyond

Resource prices have increased significantly since the turn of the century

McKinsey Commodity Price Index 1 2

Real price index: 100 = years 1999–2001 1 Figure

260 World War I 240 220 200 1970s oil shock 180 World War II

160 1.1 The economic world context 140 120 100 80 Turning Postwar Great 60 point in depression Depression price trend 0 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

1 Based on arithmetic average of four commodity sub-indexes: food, non-food agricultural raw materials, metals, and energy. 2 Data for 2013 are calculated based on average of the first three months of 2013.

SOURCE: Grilli and Yang; Pfaffenzeller; World Bank; International Monetary Fund; Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development statistics; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; UN Comtrade; McKinsey Global Institute analysis

Source: (Dobbs et al., 2013, p. 6)

As Dobbs et al. point out in Resource Revolution: landscape” with the following features (p.6ff):

Tracking global commodity markets. Trends }}rising and more volatile resource prices – survey 2013 (Dobbs et al., 2013), this is a newer sources of resources are costlier to structurally new situation, which they expect to access because of the accelerating depletion last and which creates a “changing resource of supplies

15 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

16 1. Introduction } } low prices, and subsequently to buy considerably considerably to buy subsequently and prices, low very at garments these to buy countries income high- in people allow countries poor in wages low Extremely phenomenon. of this example an is countries world’s of the poorest some to production world’s the textile outsourcing benefit al. (Alsamawi et unsustainable an for rate and ahigh at people) of (and of resources of exploitation situation a foster trade international and inequality high between coincidence global economic The ambiguous. are growth of its impact the and however, contribution Environmentally, its countries. developing and industrial in consumption and production to boosting contribution its for recognised been has trade in resource use. In economic terms, global growth the also but efficiency and to fairness relating questions distributional only not address to need urgent an is there Consequently, only an estimated average 15 per cent of the of 15 the cent average per estimated an only consumption, for of sale point At the weight. in emissions, and the product itself lighter becomes and into wastes transformed and processed is inputs of the apart cycle, life the in step each low. is With inputs of these value the while amaximum, at is inputs required of all sum the of weight –the phase extraction the – during cycle life product’s of a beginning flows. At the of trade representation aphysical and monetary a between difference the to understanding key is cycle life aproduct’s during value and weight between dynamics the Understanding deposition and cycle of resource extraction, processing, consumption 1.2 } } extraction across a variety of resources. avariety across extraction resource threaten that shortages water substitutions and resource prices, owing to interdependencies between correlation close increasingly an The monetary and physical monetary The representation of the life , 2014). of process The et al. et (Lee resources?” to affordable access over by struggles dominated order world of anew cusp the we on Are level. international the at responses coordinated and of integrated absence the in to achieve harder goals these making prosperity, economic and environmental sustainability, geopolitical stability between linkages critical suggest volatility increased and resources] [of natural prices “High solutions. for search the in important is issues environmental and in this report, the close nexus of socio-economic presented analyses of the centre the at be not will questions controversial and complex these While pollution. environmental and resources natural of wasting the to over-consumption, contribute combined trade international and sweatshop” (2005), “global the to Schor According countries. and emissions, in especially the manufacturing pollution water of chemicals, use the land-use, health, to human regard with impact adverse an has it efficient, to economically be considered is this Although rates. wage own their at produced were garments these if would, they than more for environmental impacts and added value. value. added and impacts environmental for (2000) Wright and by Clift shown been also have flows monetary and of physical trends opposing original weight is contained in the product, 2 1 value reduces to zero (see Figure 2). Figure to (see zero reduces value its and discarded, or (e.g. burned) dissipated decline; when use ends, the product is either to tend value and weight both phase, use the During maximum. its at is value product’s the waste managementcosts, itsvaluemayevenbenegative. If itcontainsrecyclingmaterial, itsvaluemaystillbe positive; ifitgivesriseto Bleischwitz, 2009; Haasetal., 2015). the pointoffinalconsumptionamounttoabout 30% ofDE(Bringezuand as showninFigure2atthesecondstagelifecycle, thenproductsat (DE) thatonlyencompassesusedextraction(i.e. oresorbiomassharvests), of saleforconsumptionisroughly15%. Ifitrefersto “domestic extraction” to “total materialrequirement” (TMR)asinFigure2, itsweightatthepoint This percentage, ofcourse, dependsonthereferenceindicator. Ifitrefers , 2013)., 2 These These 1 while while International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

Monetary values alone are not sufficiently show that reserves tend to increase in pace with extensive to enable an assessment of the extraction (production). However, it is safer to environmental burdens of traded materials. assume that ultimate physical limits to exploitable However, physical flows analysis is a complex natural resources exist and to conclude that the undertaking. Each kilogram of traded materials greater the extraction, the sooner the source is part of a long value chain, along which the will be depleted. Indicators such as “Genuine resources used generate different environmental Savings” (World Bank, 2003) and “Inclusive burdens. Moreover, the materials along the value Wealth” (UNU-IHDP and UNEP, 2012)”event- chain are frequently traded several times, which place”:”Cambridge”,”author”:[{“family”:”UNU- could entail a problem of double counting. IHDP”,”given”:””},{“family”:”UNEP”,”given”:””}],”iss ued”:{“date-parts”:[[“2012”]]}}}],”schema”:”https:// At the extraction stage, there are two github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/ environmental burdens to be considered: the master/csl-citation.json”} have been proposed gradual depletion of the source (in the case of to assess the risk of foregoing a site’s natural non-renewables) and the possible reduction in capital and the future benefits it may provide. For production potential (in the case of renewables). renewable resources like biomass, significant Depreciation of resources is expressed in issues include the relationship between the rate economic terms and the substitutability of natural of extraction and the rate of regeneration, and capital by man-made capital is mostly supposed.3 the secondary effects of habitat destruction and Physically, for non-renewable resources (such biodiversity loss (Lenzen et al., 2012). Hence, all as metals and fossil fuels), statistical sources other things being equal, high levels of extraction generate a high environmental burden. 3 See a recent critique of these indicators by the EU-FP7 project Welfare, Wealth and Work for Europe (van den Bergh and Antal, 2014).

Material use, wastes and value added along a product life cycle from extraction, across production, consumption and deposition

current current current Model assumptions: weight (t) value ($) waste&em (t) from raw material Figure 2 Figure raw material accum. value/weight extraction to used equivalent (t) waste&em (t) (sec.axis) raw material, 50% of 100 15 material is discarded

90 (difference between 13 TMR and DE); at each 80 further stage, 33% 11

70 of weight is lost to consumption and deposition processing, 9 wastes/emissions. 60 From one stage to 50 7 the next, the value increases by a factor % of maximum 40 5

Res.prod.value/weight of 1.5, but drops to 30 zero after consump- 3 20 tion (stylized facts). 1 The raw material 10 equivalent (RME) cor- 0 -1 responds to used raw used manufacture distribution nal nal material raw & consumption waste/ raw material (DE) (see extraction material retail emission Haas et al., 2015).

The production of wastes and emissions is a stages. For a typical product, the share of wastes

critical environmental burden determinant during and emissions at the extraction stage is estimated extraction, of the life cycle resource 1.2 The monetary and physical representation the extraction phase and in later processing

17 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

18 1. Introduction these are mostly called “virtual flows” (see flows” (see “virtual called mostly are these water, For equivalents. material raw upstream their including acountry in consumed materials of amount the to denote footprint” “material al. et Wiedmann explanations see Fischer-Kowalski al. et material requirement’ (for (TMR) methodological ‘total the in included extraction’ ‘unused the from extraction used separates that level cent per 50 the along and DE), extraction, to domestic (equivalent material’ to raw ‘used upward chain the follow (RMEs) equivalents’ ‘raw material The emissions. and into wastes transformed been have that requirements upstream of the weight the plus weight current of its sum the be will commodity of the equivalent’ 2). ‘raw material The Figure in wastes” “accumulated (see stage that at commodity of the requirements” “upstream the to equivalent are traded) is acommodity when example, (for observed being to stage up the accumulated have that emissions and wastes The occur along production chains. either, they as physically traded not are emissions (GHG) gas Greenhouse of wood. growing the and of crops i.e. cultivation the production, to primary linked largely are resources Land consumption. resource in ‘embodied’ always is hence and physically on domestic or international terms traded be cannot it that in aresource as water and materials both from differs Land production. of stages further at than cycle life of the stages extraction the during agriculture) and mining in (e.g. to water, required is water more as pertinent 2is Figure in materials for slope downward The countries. between directly quantities big in to traded water, rarely is water applies that except 2also Figure in illustrated materials for logic The it). to produce used materials the of all volume to the (compared stage each at lighter becomes remaining production chain, and the product itself the along occur emissions and wastes Additional cycle. life full the along occur will that emissions to be roughly 50 per cent per 50 to roughly be 4 proceed tothenextstage(seeHaasetal., 2015). amounts tomuchmorethan, say, 33%ofthe67%inuseful partsthat chain, absolutelyspeaking, 33%wasteofthetotalresourceinput (=100%) stageofthe assume aconstantshareofwasteandemissions atevery subsequent stageis, onaverage, assumedtobe33%ofDE. Evenifwe DE (seeBringezuetal., 2004). The lossfromusedextractiontoeach See footnote1above. The 50%refers to thedifferencebetween TMR and (2013) term the propose 4 of all the wastes and and wastes the of all , 2011). this bias in resource productivity is removed removed is productivity resource in bias this of part At least value. monetary and weight in trends opposing the from results simply but efficiency, technical for mistaken be not must This occurs. consumption where locations in productivity of resource levels to high the contrast in consumption), material of domestic unit per of resource productivity (as measured in GDP levels low to tend display extraction resource in specializing primarily locations that we infer Thus waste. as discarded is it when life product’s the of end the at zero to below possibly gradually, declines then and of sale, point the until up cycle Resource productivity increases along the life productivity takes a similar, irregular course. of resource ameasure as weight and value between relationship The chain. consumption extraction– the along further move they $/kg) as (i.e. value in increase products traded irregularity, this from Apart of mass. of conservation law the cost of disposal), while physically things follow consumption (it may even turn negative for the economic value of a product post- disappears (1969), the Kneese observed: is and by Ayres stated as value, of economic irregularity stage, final At the product. of the value the increasing added, labour and capital more is there stage each at slope: upward an has contrast, in chain, same the along value monetary The associated with the production process. emissions and wastes of the amounts lower consequently and resources, of their depletion less relatively -face goods -by importing chain consumption end of the extraction-consumption and retail distribution, the in specialising Centres products. of the flows the as magnitude same are of the stage at this flows emissions and turnover. wastes The material and pollution noise pollution, regional and local of increased terms in effects side potential with density, high of very is use materials and energy concentrated, spatially are agglomerations mining’. of ‘urban sites urban As become day one may that deposits waste as and use” in of “stocks quantities accumulated as considered are resources of aproduct, phase use the In explanation). further for report 3of this Chapter International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

when the indicator is expressed as GDP per the physical dimension, a country’s trade balance unit of Raw Material Consumption (RMC), or, in is positive when the weight of its imports is the terminology of Wiedmann et al. (2013), per higher than the weight of its exports. Therefore, material footprint. countries which export high-weight (but low- price) raw materials and import low-weight (but It is important to emphasize here that the high-price) commodities will tend to have both explanations above are not for technical a negative monetary and a negative physical efficiency, but an inference of the opposing trade balance. Some Latin American countries trends in weight and monetary value along the are an example of this trend, such as Argentina extraction-consumption chain of a product. between 1992 and 2000, Mexico between 1997 Hence, despite the strong link between them, and 2012, and Brazil between 1995 and 2001 physical and monetary aspects reveal different and again from 2009 until 2011. In contrast to trends. Figure 2 illustrates the background this, countries that mainly import raw materials dynamics to bear in mind when comparing and export manufactures – such as some in national economies dominated by different stages southeast Asia – tend to demonstrate positive of the life cycle (Haas et al, 2015). monetary trade balances but negative physical trade balances. This shows that physical and On the other hand, trade balances follow an monetary descriptions of trade processes look inverse logic: in the economic sense, a country’s very different, and that physical accounts provide trade balance is positive when the value of its very specific information. exports is higher than the value of its imports; in

1.3 Scope and structure of the report

This report is an assessment of the scientific the physical trade database built and maintained literature on the biophysical features of by Monika Dittrich, cited as Dittrich (2012).6 This is international trade, and the implications of based on United Nations Comtrade data (SITC-1 the current trade system for efficient and until 1993 and SITC-3 thereafter; UN, n.d.) and environmentally considerate use of the world’s includes global accounts of imports and exports natural resources. It refers to material resources in physical (mass) units for 130, and later, 170 (biomass, metals and minerals, construction countries. All missing mass values in United minerals and fossil fuels), water resources and Nations Comtrade were filled using the global of the report 1.3 Scope and structure land resources. As an assessment, it depends on annual price for each commodity group, starting the time horizon of the primary literature. Although at the most differentiated level, then summed efforts were made to extend the observation up according to the classification structure. period to the past 50 years, most of the analyses Values of direct trade flows of major outliers were at least cover the period from 1980 to 2010. An corrected by adjusting the values with regard assessment also depends on the differentiations to global prices, amounts of global imports and (for example, regional aggregates or country exports and – as far as available – bilateral trade selections) used in the primary literature; efforts to data as well as national and international sectorial secure comparability did not always lead to fully statistics such as those from the United Nations satisfactory results. Food and Agriculture Organization (UN FAO) or the International Energy Agency (IEA). Detailed The only primary database5 we could access was methodological descriptions are given by Dittrich (2010) and Dittrich and Bringezu (2010). 5 However, another database created by Wiedmann et al. (2013) on the material footprints of nations 1990–2010 (http://www.pnas.org/ cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1220362110) has since become openly accessible (http://worldmrio.com) and contains information on the Raw Material Equivalents of the imports and exports of all countries. For reasons 6 The physical trade database was developed by Dittrich at the University of of both time and resources, primary analysis of these data was not possible. Cologne and the Wuppertal Institute in Germany.

19 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

20 1. Introduction humans, man-made artefacts (infrastructure, buildings, vehicles, machinery, durable goods, etc.) goods, durable machinery, vehicles, buildings, (infrastructure, artefacts man-made humans, include stocks biophysical these convention, By stocks. biophysical socio-economic of maintenance and operation establishment, the for required are that flows material the all measures EW-MFA 2011). al. et (Fischer-Kowalski datasets available among consistency of level ahigh in resulting few years, box”. promoted vigorously has in been and standardization harmonization the Methodological past a“black as therein processes any and itself system socio-economic the treats but system, economic asocio- of outputs and (2011). inputs Union material all European the in considers EW-MFA reporting statistical standard the of apart and method applied widely most the is (EW-MFA) Accounting Flow Material Economy-Wide area, this Within (OECD, 2008). substances to single materials aggregate from or level to local national from accounts different of family abroad represents Accounting Flow Material to accountingused systems. economic complement is interactions society-nature of representation 2001; biophysical This OECD, 2008). (Eurostat, tons) (metric units mass in air, and water measured excluding materials, liquid and gaseous solid, all are considered flows physical The stocks. socio-economic maintaining or building in used have been that system socio-economic ofa out and into flows material all (MFA) quantifies Accounting Flow Material Material FlowAccounting–methodsanddata Infobox 1 measures for (various) environmental pressures of aggregate generation the allow methods and pollution. While life cycle assessment abstraction water degradation, to land involved, emissions and infrastructure respective the and kilometres to transport extraction/production of stages certain with associated wastes and toxic emissions the from range they cycle: life their during goods traded with associated pressure of environmental kinds several are There materialflows.net www.materialflows.net at published are 1980 from to 2010 period the covering years) 170 recent than (in more and years) countries earlier (in of 130 countries balances trade physical and exports and of imports values aggregated The quality. of mixed are statistics the countries other for while reliability, and to differentiation respect with good holds countries American Latin and of OECD majority the for statistics Comtrade Nations United the general, In statistics. trade and/or sectorial, further national and international partners trade from data bilateral extrapolation, using estimated were countries from missing data trade original the levels, global and In order to calculate aggregates at regional ; Dittrich, 2012).; Dittrich, ( www. use, energy use and CO and use energy use, water upstream for applied be can approach 2). Figure (see Asimilar commodities traded to linked flows material of upstream amounts of aggregate assessment the allow methods Other report. this to in do we sought have way in the series, in time and manner specific acountry- in to so do able always not are they associated with the life cycle of a commodity, impacts, compared to other production centres. centres. production to other compared impacts, consequently, generates fewer environmental and, resources fewer requires production their where countries/locations from to obtained be commodities allows it in that efficient, resource be could trade that being assumption basic the time, over changes it of how and trade international of efficiency resource of the assessment an enables of methods acombination constraints, certain for to made be has allowance some Although others. than mature more are some and development, under are methods the period; time and country/region by specified pressures environmental to assess models (MRIO) output life cycle assessment and multi-regional input- analysis, flow material upon based methods of acombination weused have report, of the sections production... further In primary net plant 2 emissions, land and and land emissions, , International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

and productive livestock (animal husbandry and aquaculture). With respect to EW-MFA accounting, two system boundaries need to be defined: one between the socio-economic system and its natural environment, and another concerning the relationship to other socio-economic systems. With regard to the first boundary, material inputs are raw materials extracted from the domestic natural environment (domestic extraction, DE), and outputs are wastes and emissions released into the natural environment (domestic processed outputs, DPO). Flows crossing the second boundary are imports from and exports to other national economies. Following the laws of thermodynamics, in particular the law of conservation of mass, material inputs equal material outputs, corrected by stock changes (for more details, see Eurostat, 2001). Stock changes are material flows to socio-economic stocks with a lifetime exceeding one year, or materials released from physical stocks and transformed into wastes and emissions.

Domestic extraction (DE) is defined as the raw materials extracted from nature. DE includes agricultural harvests and forestry, as well as raw material extraction from mining and quarrying. Material flows are usually grouped according to four main material categories:

1. Biomass (harvested, plant-based biomass, i.e. crops, timber, grazed biomass, crop residues used, as well as animal biomass from wild fish catch and hunting. Biomass production from domestic livestock is not accounted as DE). 2. Metallic minerals (ores, accounted for as the mass leaving the mine, including the waste rock, i.e. “run-of-mine” approach). 3. Non-metallic minerals (minerals used in industrial processing or for construction purposes, such as sand, clays, phosphate, salt, diamonds, etc.) 4. Fossil energy carriers (coal, crude oil, natural gas, or non-conventional energy sources such as gas hydrate, shale gas). Material extraction data are compiled from official statistics (i.e. agricultural statistics, mining statistics, production statistics, etc., (for details, see Eurostat, 2012). Some flows, such as crop residues, grazed biomass, or non-metallic minerals used for construction purposes, are only poorly or not reported at all in official statistics; in such cases, the extraction data have to be estimated using standardized MFA estimation procedures (Eurostat, 2013, 2009). In addition, gross ores often have to be estimated on the basis of metal concentrates reported in statistics and the corresponding ore grades ( Eurostat, 2013).

Trade flows comprise products at different stages of processing, i.e. primary goods (copper ores or wheat), secondary products (copper wires or wheat flour) and final goods (mobile phones or cakes). During accounting for exports and imports in EW-MFA, goods are considered with their respective mass at the time of crossing administrative borders. The corresponding data source is foreign trade of the report 1.3 Scope and structure statistics, which report traded commodities in monetary and physical units.

To ascertain total raw material use in a country’s final consumption, all raw materials used in the production process of traded goods need to be considered. MFA summarizes these raw material inputs as the Raw Material Equivalents (RME; Eurostat, 2001; Schaffartzik et al., 2014a) of traded goods. Adding (respectively subtracting) the RME of imports and exports to (or from) the domestic material consumption (DMC) yields the indicator Raw Material Consumption (RMC; Schaffartzik et al., 2014a) or material footprint (Schoer et al., 2012; Wiedmann et al., 2013).

In the course of extraction, some materials are moved or extracted without the intention of using them in socio-economic processing or attributing economic value to them. These flows are commonly termed “unused extraction” and include unused by-products in agriculture (straw and roots left on the fields), by-catch in fishery, overburden in mining, or soil and rock excavated during the construction of infrastructure (Dittrich et al., 2012; Eurostat, 2001). Often, no statistical data are available to account for unused extraction, and the mass of flows has to be estimated (Bringezu and Bleischwitz, 2009).

There are a number of MFA indicators (Eurostat, 2001; Fischer-Kowalski et al., 2011), and the most prominently used among them are:

21 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

22 1. Introduction } } } } } } } of an LCA is to assess all environmental burdens connected to a product or service consumed in a in consumed service or to aproduct connected burdens environmental all LCA to an of assess is or chain ofgroupsproducts The rationale specific of products. extraction-production-consumption al. et (Bringezu LCA the For approach requirements. upstream material respective their plus traded directly materials of sum 2001), the as is, Eurostat, that (RME; Equivalents” Material “Raw as be expressed flows to trade direct allows It nationally. extracted or imported indirectly) or (directly were resources these whether year, and to specific ina country specific of a demand final to the connected resources of type and volume to the responds It by societies. consumed materials raw of amount the on focuses approach IO The extraction. to resource addition in economy the within processed inputs system physical as imports physical all includes perspective national the contrast, In state. anation of boundaries system the crossing flows as counted not thus and flows internal as considered are process production the of steps different the along flows that trade Inter-industry economy. extracting the than other countries in demand to final allocated resources to extracted reduced is trade approach, MRIO the Under process. production global one as considered are processes production All demand. final of to centres resource the of distribution and extraction resource global from starts MRIO perspective aglobal terms, material – InThe choice of global approaches. or perspective national role – in plays IO-based an important extracted. resources of total sum the equals composition, their and consumption, to final allocated resources of total sum the so and countries, in various demand final to meet top-down distributed are year reference the in extracted resources applies: principle basic same the However, cases, both in aggregates. regional for true holds same The standardized. fully yet not are that assumptions of anumber requires and Wiedmann comprehensive IO for table global level calculation (Tukker and Dietzenbacher, 2013; 2009; Wiedmann, no is there as tables, IO multi-region to create have interlinked to be tables IO national level, a global At exports. its and to country the within categories demand final to allocated coefficients, monetary of help the with then, are materials year.These aspecific in materials resource of extraction domestic of type and amount the economy, and national the is accounts of system reference the approach, IO the In different. is fundamentally approaches al. et Schaffartzik example, for see, a discussion, (for approaches LCA-IO ‘hybrid’ to form combined be can approaches two These requirements. land or water energy, material, upstream the to calculate order in multiplied are goods traded which with products, of (LCI) inventories cycle life the from coefficients uses approach second the categories; demand to final down economies, between and economy the through deliveries inter-industry trace (IO) to models input-output extended environmentally uses approach first the approaches: two al. et al. al. et studies being (Bruckner published several with 15 past the years, in rapid been has RME calculating of methods of development The requirements Methods ofcalculatingRawMaterialEquivalentsorupstream resource } } } } } } } et al. , 2014a; et Schoer Raw Material Consumption (RMC) = DE + RME of imports – RME of exports exports of –RME imports of +RME =DE (RMC) Consumption Material Raw GDP/DMC = Productivity Resource or Efficiency Resource –exports. =imports (PTB) Trade Balance Physical –exports. +imports =DE (DMC) Consumption Material Domestic +imports. =DE (DMI) Input Material Direct Total Material Requirements (TMR) = DMI + RME of imports + unused extraction extraction +unused imports of +RME =DMI (TMR) Requirements Total Material exports of –RME imports of =RME (RTB) Trade Balance Material Raw et al. , 2012; et Wiedmann et al. et , 2011)2013; al. et Wiedmann 2009; Wiedmann, , 2013, 2012; Tukker al. et , 2013). Upstream resource use in trade is calculated primarily through through primarily calculated is trade in use , 2013). resource Upstream , 2012; al. et Giljum et al. et Dittrich , 2004; , 2014; 2011, Kovanda, and Weinzettel Wiebe 2009; , 2014a). two the of However, reference systems the , 2014; al. et Muñoz , 2012), the systems reference is the the is , 2012), reference systems the , 2011. procedure acomplex is This et et Schaffartzik , 2009; International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

certain country in a certain year, irrespective of where and when the service or product was produced. Since the early 1990s, significant efforts have been made to build LCA inventories for a broad variety of products and services, and to standardize procedures (Klöpffer, 1997). The original purpose of LCA was to guide comparisons between products and services across a standardized set of indicators for environmental burdens, particularly resource use. When LCA-based coefficients are used in the analysis of the upstream resource requirements of international trade, the analysis follows a bottom-up procedure with the respective national consumption as the point of departure. Owing to the complex international, inter-temporal and inter-product linkage of extraction-production-consumption chains, it cannot be guaranteed that the global sum total of resources used equals the sum total of resources actually extracted.

The LCA approach offers a ‘cradle-to-grave’ analysis of resource use. However, the further processing and use of traded commodities are usually not known; thus, ‘cradle-to-product’ coefficients for traded commodities account for upstream flows representing the process chain from delivery of the traded goods backward to primary production. A number of inventories assist in the calculation of LCA coefficients for products; these coefficients not only refer to the amount of materials used, but also, sometimes, to the associated unused extraction of primary resources (Bringezu, 2000). The approach has been widely applied on the product level, and a limited number of studies have analysed its application at the national level (Schütz et al., 2004 for the EU; UBA et al., 2008 for Germany). One global analysis has been published by Dittrich and colleagues (2012), covering trade between 1962 and 2010 in five-year steps.

The LCA approach differs from IO-based approaches in the following ways:

}} The LCA-based approach used by Dittrich et al. (2012) and presented in this report also includes unused material extraction, i.e. overburden in mining, crop or harvest residues in agriculture and forestry, and by-catch in fishery. Soil erosion is also included as part of unused extraction. }} As the LCA approach analyses the relationship between imported goods (or product groups) and their respective volumes of upstream material use, it allocates all upstream requirements to the material category of the traded product. For example, the fossil fuel required to process a metal is assigned to the material group “metal ores”. Hence the LCA approach does not classify upstream material use according to the material of origin. 1.3 Scope and structure of the report 1.3 Scope and structure

23 Credit: Land Rover Our Planet, flickr Globally, on average, the share of exports in in of exports share the average, on Globally, significant foreconomic growth inGDP terms. are flows trade dynamics, their Through Dynamics intrade,population,GDP,extractionandconsumption,1980–2010 (UNCTAD, terms 2013), monetary in measured when increase cent per a640 represents trade of volume the 3). While (Figure decade past the of half second the during trade global in increase to 1980s arapid led the have since liberalization trade towards countries many among trend the and globalization countries, of developing industrialization the consumption, global Rising ofimportance trade 2.1 billion tonnes -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 1980 Trade volumes are growing and with them the 1990 2. Trade2. in resources and commodities commodities and 2000 2010 In physical terms, though, the volume of world of world volume the though, terms, physical In 2012)). Bank, 1980 in 19 (World with cent per 2010 in cent 28 per (compared around was GDP rate of 2.4 cent. growth per average annual by an increased volumes trade physical between, in period the During crisis. financial to global the owing 2009, in and crisis, oil 1980 1983, to second and the owing between twice: observed was flows trade in A decrease 1980 2010. and total between in doubling than steadily, more more grew volumes trade physical Upper middleincome High income:nonOECD Low income Lower middleincome High income:OECD (SERI, 2011) materialflows.net database www. from theonline consumption, for extractionand Dittrich (2012); ical trade,from (2012); forphys- the World Bank tion originatefrom GDP andpopula- monetary trade, Sources: data for

Figure 3 25 2.1 Trade volumes are growing and with them the importance of trade International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

trade rose by a factor of 2.5 from 1980 to 2011, goods and services exported to other countries, while global resource extraction, representing even if part of those materials never left the global consumption in physical terms, less than country of origin (Wiedmann et al., 2013). doubled. Thus, world trade, in economic and Owing to the inverse trends in weight and value physical terms, was more dynamic than global in the life cycle of products, as described in consumption. Until the global financial crisis, the Introduction, the composition of traded physical trade volumes increased twice as fast commodities looks very different in physical and as material extraction. This increase was driven monetary terms (see Figure 4): manufactured by a growth in the total amount of materials commodities dominate trade volumes in traded, in combination with a prolongation of monetary terms, while fossil fuels hold the highest production chains: the same material was traded share of trade volumes in physical terms. In several times, before it arrived at the point of final monetary terms, manufactures account for three- demand. Currently, around 20 per cent of global quarters of traded volume, whereas fossil fuels physical trade volumes arise from increasing only represent 16 per cent (in 2010, see Figure 4). specialization and the lengthening of value From a physical perspective, however, the picture chains. Extraction, production and consumption is dominated by materials in the early stages continue to be primarily domestic: globally, of processing, in particular fossil fuels, which nearly nine-tenths of total material extraction is represent half of the traded volumes (48 per cent consumed domestically, while one-tenth (12 per in 2010, Figure 4), while manufactures comprise cent in 2008) is reallocated via international trade only 20 per cent of traded volumes.7 (Dittrich, 2010). However, when upstream material requirements of traded commodities are included,

these statistics change. Out of the 70 billion tons 7 These physical relations are particularly relevant when international transport of materials extracted globally in 2008, 40 per is considered: here, of course, weights and volumes count. In the case of a substantial reduction of fossil fuel use, as demanded by climate policies, cent was extracted and used in the production of more than half of current international transport would disappear.

Shares of commodity groups in trade in physical versus monetary terms, 1980 and 2010

Sources: trade, monetary: WTO (2012); Figure 4 Figure trade, physically: Dittrich (2012); assig- nation according to 2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade WTO (2012), where fuels, mining products and agricultural products include only primary goods. Further processed goods are aggregated under manufactures.

Current patterns of resource use show that cent. The material composition in trade, on the global material extraction is mainly composed other hand, is different (see Figure 5). Fossil of non-metallic minerals used for construction fuels make up half of the total trade, followed purposes, such as sand, gravel, limestone, clays, by metals and biomass. Non-metallic minerals etc. (SERI, 2011). These materials comprise play only a minor role in global trade.8 Over the 44 per cent of material extraction worldwide. Another 28 per cent is accounted for in biomass 8 This is very different when we consider upstream requirements of trade: built infrastructure (such as roads, harbours, buildings) and the materials required materials, followed by fossil fuels at 19 per for them play a major role among the upstream requirements of traded commodities (Wiedmann et al., 2013, p. 2)

26 2013). goods are allocatedtothematerialcategoriesaccording tothemainmaterialcomponent(seealsoEurostat, egories followsmaterialcharacteristicsasimplementedinMFA. Thus,manufactures andhigher-processed resources among countries. countries. among resources of demand and of supply sources the investigate to aims section following the different, often are consumption final and of extraction centres as However, volumes. trade physical in a growth by accompanied been has and decades past in significant been has use resource in Growth 2.2 resource local Consequently, metals. and fuels fossil as such resources particularly demand, of final to point the of availability point the from moved increasingly are resources trade, Through 9 Source: Dittrich, 2012;*measured as(imports+exports)/2. Physical tradeaccordingtomaterialcomposition,1980–2010 of fossil volume The respectively. cent per 84 and 16 cent around at per constant fairly remained non-metallic minerals, fossil energy carriers) has versus non-renewable materials (metallic and materials (biomass) renewable of traded share the aresult, As increased. have sub-categories material four of all volumes traded years, 30 past distortions andasymmetriesintradestatistics, empiricallythisisnotquitethecase. This iswhywemeasuretheamountoftradedvolumesas(imports+exports)/2. Importsandexportsrepresentalltradeflowsreportedinforeignstatistics. Atagloballevel, thesumofimportsshouldequalexports. Owingtosome Suppliers and demanders in the world economy 9 Incontrasttofigure 4,theaggregation tothecat- resources and resource use in general. general. in use resource and resources unavailable) of (locally kinds of all consumption boosting to contributes trade and affluence or size population constrains longer no scarcity to 1980). in 16 cent (compared per 2010 in cent of 20 per ashare reached and significantly increased hand, other the on metals, 2010 in tocent 56% 1980). in (compared Trade in to per 48 dropped trade global in fuels of fossil 1980 2010. and between share The declined rates growth its but large, is trade carriers energy longstanding interdependencies, mutual trade evolved skills and technologies, colonial relations, historically also and extraction, for of space include resource endowment and availability extraction resource determining Factors diverse. highly is globe the around extraction Resource Resource extractionandtrade International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Figure 5 27 2.2 Suppliers and demanders in the world economy International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

agreements, etc. As a result, countries and domestic resources. Exports amounted to less regions contribute different amounts and types than 15 per cent of domestic extraction, except of commodities to global markets, forming a for the oil-exporting regions of North Africa and functional differentiation in the global economy. Western Asia. Physical trade volumes increased significantly in the next 40 years. In 2010, By 2010, all world regions were extracting and 15 per cent of all globally extracted resources using more resources than in 1970 (Krausmann became part of direct trade, and 41 per cent et al., 2009). However, there were substantial was indirectly associated with trade (used in the differences in regional trends: while in mature production process, but not physically included industrial regions such as Europe, North America in the traded goods). Imports now represent and the Russian Federation domestic extraction 15 per cent of domestic extraction globally. In of resources hardly increased, in the remaining North America and Europe, dependency on regions it doubled or tripled, or even increased imports is significantly higher: in North America, five-fold, as seen in southern, south-eastern, and imports amount to 20 per cent and in Europe eastern Asia (Figure 6). In 1970, one-tenth of the up to 60 per cent of locally extracted resources. global extraction was traded among countries Major exporting regions today are Australia and (direct trade). In all regions, imports amounted Oceania, which export half of their resource to less than 10 per cent of domestic extraction extraction, North Africa and Western Asia, as and thus held low importance. Only Europe was well as Central Asia and the Russian Federation importing one-third of materials in addition to (30 per cent), and Europe (40 per cent).

Resource extraction, imports and exports by world region, 1970 and 2010

8 DE IM EX 1970 [billion t] 7 6

Figure 6 Figure 5 4 3 2 1 0 LACA NAWA SSA SEEA OA CA NA EUR 10 2010 [billion t] 9 DE IM EX 8 2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade 7 LACA Latin America, Carrribean 6 NAWA Northern Africa, Western Asia 5 SSA Sub-Saharan Africa 4 SEEA South / South-East Asia 3 OA Oceania and Australia 2 CA Central Asia, Russian Fed. 1 NA Northern America 0 EUR Europe LACA NAWA SSA SEEA OA CA NA EUR

DE = Domestic Extraction, IM = Imports, EX = Exports. Regional imports and exports represent the total sum of imports and exports of the countries in the region; that is, intra-regional trade is included. Source: (Schaffartzik et al., 2014b)

Europe demonstrates the highest trade methodological construct because imports and dependency, with both a high demand for exports represent the total sum of all countries in foreign resources and a high level of industrial the region, including intra-regional trade. Europe production for exports. In part, though, this is a consists of numerous relatively small countries

28 it supports the monetary trends presented in in presented trends monetary the supports it Potsdam; PIK in the at (forthcoming) colleagues and by Pichler recently only undertaken was data trade physical of bilateral analysis An comtrade.un.org/db/) Source: Calculations byPeterP. PichlerandHelgaWeisz, DataSource: UNComtrade,DESA/UNSD(http:// upper-middle-income countriesaccording toWB,H=high-incomecountries,C= China. Legend: Countries are classifiedbytheirincomein1995,according to World Bank. L=low, lower- middle-and The physicaltradebetweencountriesgroupedalongincomelines 21 the in imports to regard 1980s), with the in also but occurred (this to exports regard with (SEA) Asia eastern has been overtaken by south-eastern/southern/ Europe decades, recent In of Europe. whole the to size in comparable country, asingle is States United other, the one with while trading often global trade flows. flows. trade global of three-quarters for responsible are together Europe and Asia regions. other to of the that comparable rate is America’s North exports, of terms In America. North is region importing Asian countries (mainly China). The third-highest large of some of trade volume the in growth by significant driven mainly is dynamic trade SEEA The exports). (2010: of global cent per 39 crisis oil second the during except years, all in together exported the highest volume of materials example, al. et Giljum for also, (see world’s activities of the trade half nearly for 2010, In exports. responsible was it and imports in growth extraordinary by an st century. SEA is characterized characterized is SEA century. , 2011). countries SEEA countries), high-income countries and China China and countries high-income countries), low-income countries (including middle-income between trade physical the shows Figure 7 al. et (Lee report Futures Resource the 2013, 2007; 2003). WTO, (UNCTAD, Asia South-East and East in countries between relations trade in increase by astrong driven extent, 2013). to was, alarge dynamic This al. et (Lee before ever than higher are South to the North the from exports while shrunk, has hand, other the on trade, of North-North share The trade. of global one-third to almost amounts now and decade asingle within Dollars) US in (measured doubled trade of South-South share al. et (Lee Futures Resources on Report House Chatham the In symmetrical. more South the and North the between relations 21stthe making century, in stronger even become has trend This market. world the entering began and liberalization trade towards steps took economies emerging 1980s, the however, During several providers. resource as acted primarily countries Developing South. the from imports with countries northern mature the among concentrated War, World was trade Second the Following , 2013), the that showed authors the International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2013)., ,

Figure 7 29 2.2 Suppliers and demanders in the world economy International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

(the latter was taken out of the group of low (such as the regions discussed in the following income countries in order to highlight its effect section), intra-regional trade balances out. Thus, separately). Trade to China shows the highest the physical trade balance represents only inter- growth rates between 1990 and 2010, and an regional trade. increase by a factor of 28 in trade from high- Until 2007, Europe was the biggest net-importer income countries to China, and by a factor of of commodities, followed by North America. 86 in trade from low-income countries to China. The demand for commodities from Europe Trade from China to low-income countries also and North America was met by Latin America, increased, by a factor of 20. If China is included in Australia (including Oceania) and Africa (Figure 8, the group of low- and middle-income countries, left).10 Despite its high amounts of imports and trade activities within this group will show an exports, Asia’s trade was physically well balanced increase by a factor of 13 between 1990 and until 2007. Thereafter, Asia’s material imports 2010. Trade to, from and within high-income increased much faster than its exports, resulting countries, on the other hand, only increased by a in a steep increase in its net imports. By 2010, factor of 2-4. Asia demanded nearly as many materials from The trade activities of low-income countries (excl. the world market as Europe. China) mainly comprise imports and exports of The dynamics of monetary trade balances mineral raw materials (i.e. industrial and metal are quite different. For economic reasons, minerals, as well as fossil fuels). In 1990, these monetary trade is usually more or less balanced. goods made up 50-80 per cent of all traded However, trade deficits and trade surpluses are goods (measured in tons). In 2010, the share not uncommon. Compared with recent years, was still between 60 and 85 per cent, the latter monetary trade balances were more or less even representing goods traded from low-income throughout regions during the 1980s. From 1990 countries to China. onwards, Asia – the second largest importer of materials – increased its trade surplus steadily. Trade balances in monetary and In the case of North America, imports steadily physical terms – providers and exceeded exports, and so North America has had by far the most deficient monetary trade balance demanders since 1980; its monetary trade balance nearly Net trade flows are obtained by balancing imports inversely mirrors Asia’s monetary trade balance and exports, which classifies countries as (Figure 8, right). The other regions had a much either physically net-importing or net-exporting. more even trade balance until recently. Since the 2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade Physically net-importing countries are dependent 2008 economic crisis, however, patterns appear on materials in the form of goods from other to have changed, especially for Africa, which has countries for use in production processes or for experienced a steep increase in its trade surplus. final consumption. Physical net exporters, on the other hand, provide materials to global markets. 10 It should be noted that in particular some African countries are still missing In physical trade balances of country aggregates in the assessment of 2010, thus here and in the following figures, the African values for 2010 should be taken as preliminary.

30 Physical tradebalancesofcontinentsbymaterialcategory,2010 categories material of both importer net largest the consequently were and materials, metal and of biomass amounts increasing need countries 9). Asian (Figure continent Asian the for fuels fossil of balance anear in resulting Asia, of Western exports net fuel fossil large by the matched was fuels of fossil 2010, In import net fuels. large the Asian countries have increasingly imported fossil South and East time, same At the years. many for fuels of fossil suppliers largest the been have countries, Asian West particular in and countries, importing biomass, specificallycereals. Asian increasingly while market, to world the metals and fuels fossil mainly supplied have countries African balances. trade dominate also fuels Fossil Trade balance by continents in physical (left) and monetary (right) terms, 1980–2010 Source: (Dittrich, 2012) -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 Billion tonnes Afrika Asia Europe America Latin

America fuels in 2010. in fuels fossil and of metals exporter net largest second the also was which America, by Latin followed is It decades. the over slightly only of biomass exports its increased has of biomass, exporter largest the being America, North continents. the of all fuels fossil and of metals supplier net largest 2010, In metals. the was it particular in materials, of kinds all exported Oceania) (including Australia use. final domestic for fuels of fossil amounts large importing Europe with trade, physical positive mainly with category only the are fuels Fossil balanced. fairly is trade net its thus and commodities from all material categories, exported and 2010.in imported Europe North

Australia& Oceania International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment biomass Fossil fuels Metals Minerals Other exports. imports minus are countedas trade balances imports, physical exports minus are countedas trade balances while monetary please note: terms: (UN,n.d.); 2012), monetary terms:(Dittrich, Sources: physical balances out. gional trade trade; intra-re- inter-regional resents only region rep- exports) ofa imports minus (defined as Trade Balance The Physical

Figure 9 Figure 8 31 2.2 Suppliers and demanders in the world economy International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

Trade, in physical terms, has been dominated by Australia was the largest exporter of materials a minority of countries, although concentration with a diverse export structure including in trade decreased in the period from 1980 to commodities made up of biomass, metals and 2010. In 1980, the ten countries with the highest fossil fuels (Figure 10). Australia was followed trade volume imported and exported together by the Russian Federation, which exported 56 per cent of all traded materials, while the ten mainly fossil fuels. Brazil’s export structure is not largest trading countries imported and exported as diverse as that of Australia, but still covers 46 per cent of globally traded materials in 2008. a wide range of metals and biomass, while In contrast, the 75 countries with the lowest Indonesia’s exports were mainly dominated by trade volumes increased their share only slightly; fossil fuels. China imported the most materials together they imported and exported 0.6 per cent in 2010, mainly metals, followed by fossil fuels of globally traded materials in 1980 and 0.8 per and biomass. The second largest importer was cent in 2008. The global financial crisis again led the EU-27, where imports were dominated by to a higher concentration in trade, combined with fossil fuels. Although the United States imports a larger participation by small trading countries: more non-renewable materials than the Republic the ten largest trading countries were responsible of Korea, it has fewer net imports, owing to its for 50 per cent of physical trade volumes in 2010, exports of biomass. It is interesting to note that, and the 75 countries with the smallest physical apart from China, the imports of other large net trade volume traded 1.2 per cent of materials. importers are dominated by fossil fuels. Metals hold the second-largest import share, except in The countries that dominate trade in physical the case of India, the third largest supplier of iron terms show different trade profiles with respect and steel. to imported and exported materials. In 2010,

Largest net exporters and importers by material composition, 2010

1500

Other Minerals Metals Fossil fuels biomass 1000 million tonnes Figure 10 Figure

500

2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade -500

-1000

Iran Italy Brazil Arabia Algeria Africa SpainFrance India Japan China Australia Indonesia NorwayCanada Germany *EU-27* Saudi South United StatesKorea, Rep. United Kingdom Russian Federation

Source: (Dittrich, 2012)

The number of net importing countries exceeded south-eastern Asian islands, were the largest the number of net exporting countries in all suppliers of materials. The United States, Japan years, and increased over the years. In 2010, 30 and west European countries remained large per cent of all countries supplied materials to importers throughout the three decades. While world markets, while 70 per cent of all countries the number of net exporters is decreasing, they net-imported them. In 2010, South American are increasing their export volumes in order to countries, Canada, Scandinavia, west and central meet growing demand from the world market. Asian countries, as well as Australia and the

32 the discovery of resources, in particular oil. oil. particular in of resources, discovery the toimporter becoming a supplier accompanies aresource being from change pattern The patterns. their changed have that countries and of resources importers or suppliers persistent been have that countries 12 Figure highlights countries. these among most populous in economies the world, are the as India, and China Africa). south-west and south-east in countries example, (for importers to net exporters net being from changed have countries afew Only America). Veins” (of Latin “Open the as (1997) Galeano described Eduardo what as figure often and resources providing are hand, other the on Australia, and East Middle the Asia, Central America, South along. all materials of importers net remained have Uganda) and (e.g. Africa Madagascar south-east in particular in countries, poor several also but States United the and Japan countries, European Western years. the over exporter net or importer net a of being pattern overall their changed not have generally countries time, same At the Source: (Dittrich, 2012) Physical tradebalancesofcountries,2010 equally increasing amount of exports. amount increasing equally the outpacing is goods) other for also but fuels fossil for (mainly imports for demand increasing an where economies, emerging rapidly often are them to importing resources exporting from shift that Countries imports. previous has it, increasinglyexported outbalancing 1996, in Sudan started of petroleum extraction the Since process. of this example an is Sudan 11 predominantly agricultural produce. of exports increasing countries’ the exceeds energy and food for demand increasing Egypt, or Kenya as such population, arising with countries In ores. of iron exports increasing) (also its exceeded have fuels of fossil imports increasing 1990s, the since atrend: of such example an This appliesparticularlytoenergycarriersusedin theproductionprocess. weight thanthegoodstheyproducefromtheseraw materialsforexports. to apositivephysicaltradebalance, astherawmaterialsimportedhavemore [Nina:which arenotforinternal/domestic? yes, domestic]demand, theyshift Even iftheseemergingeconomiesusetheirimports toproducecommodities International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 11 India is is India

Figure 11 33 2.2 Suppliers and demanders in the world economy International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

Persistence and change in net-importing and net-exporting countries, 1962–2010 Figure 12 Figure

Source: (Dittrich, 2012)

Increasing dependency on the same time, there was not a significant rise in the number of net-exporting countries (which net- world market exported more than 3 per cent). Thus, while in The higher the share of imports in a country’s 1980 there were 54 import-dependent countries, total annual input of materials (DMI = direct as opposed to 36 countries with high net exports, material input), the higher its dependency on the the ratio changed to 102 versus 45 by 2008. world market. In countries with little integration Dependence on the global market for delivering into the world market, import dependency is low. vital commodities is increasing substantially This applies, for example, to Sudan, Burundi, around the world. All material categories Central African Republic, Iran, Ethiopia and witnessed an increase in import dependency, but Afghanistan: their share of imports in DMI is less

2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade the most significant rise was seen in resources than 2 per cent. In contrast, small high-income such as fossil fuels and metals. In 2008, more countries, such as the Netherlands, Singapore than 100 countries imported more than half of and Belgium-Luxembourg, are highly integrated their fossil fuel requirements (85 countries in with the world market and hence show the 1980) and 97 countries imported more than half highest dependencies; they need to import of their metals requirements (75 countries in around three-quarters of their materials input 1980). Fossil fuels and metals are special cases (data for 2008). in terms of dependence: in 2008, 24 countries Global dependence on material imports has exported more than half of their fossil fuel increased during the past three decades, extraction (20 countries in 1980) and six countries because the imports of most countries have exported more than half of their metal extraction increased faster than their extraction rates. (10 countries in 1980). But import dependence Whereas, in 1980, only 27 per cent of all is not limited to these point resources (metals countries net-imported more than 3 per cent of and fossil fuels) that are not available everywhere their material input (DMI), in 2008, 51 per cent in the world. For countries with unfavourable of all countries did so (see Figure 13). At the bio-geographical conditions, for example small

34 resource producers. If some resource producers fewer ever on relies balance its increasing: also is system trading current of the vulnerability the but rising, is interdependency global Thus, Source: (Dittrichetal.,2012) Geographical distributionofresourcedependencein1980and2008 1980). in At the (9 countries need countries these biomass of the half than more supply and vital are imports biomass Kuwait, as such countries Asian West or Seychelles, the as such islands 2008 1980 countries depending on those imports. imports. those on depending countries on impact destabilizing amajor have may this reasons, political/military for exports stop even or decrease or sources of their depletion experience extracts. it biomass the half than more exports country no biomass: of their share of alarge providers net are countries afew only time, same International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Figure 13 35 2.2 Suppliers and demanders in the world economy International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

2.3 Is the organization of the world market still scaling with income levels, or are new patterns emerging?

Throughout most of the 20th century, global trade trapped in a “development of underdevelopment” patterns tracked income patterns. High-income (Frank, 1966). industrial countries imported a large amount of resources, mainly from low-income countries, Since the turn of the century, these patterns of and exported a smaller amount of processed “unequal exchange” appear to have undergone goods to the low-income countries. Up until the significant change. During the twentieth century, 1980s, only high-income OECD countries were rapidly growing resource use coincided with net importers of materials, while all other countries decreasing prices. Since 2000, the global were net suppliers. During this period, resource demand for resources has risen faster, driven, prices consistently declined (see also Dobbs et in particular, by rapidly emerging economies al. 2013). These patterns are, according to the such as China. The increasing competition for analysis of Raul Prebisch (1949), characterized resources and the rising prominence of scarcity by the use of natural resources and unqualified of natural resources as issues of strategic labour, whereas the imported products from importance leads to gains in political and the North are capital- and knowledge-intensive. economic power for resource-rich countries. In Prebisch’s interpretation of the international These gains are realized as a result of the “division of labour” between the centres and increased value of extraction and exports, hence the periphery, a centre can acquire the primary impacts on the world economy, power structures material and energy resources for its production and trade are to be expected. and consumption from the periphery at a continuously declining price, while economic In recent decades, non-OECD countries with high development at the periphery is hampered by incomes (mainly oil-exporting countries), countries rising prices for the imported goods it requires. with upper-middle incomes, such as Russia, Prebisch suggested that a development strategy Brazil and South Africa, and also high-income will not be successful if economic activity in the OECD countries, such as Australia, Canada and south is concentrated on the production and New Zealand, have become important suppliers export of primary commodities to industrial of materials to the world market. At the same centres (Pérez-Rincón, 2006, p. 520; Prebisch, time, countries with lower-middle incomes 1949; Singer, 1950). The deterioration of the terms have increased their net imports substantially,

2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade of trade for the South is theoretically explained by steadily changing their profiles from suppliers to two complementary economic hypotheses: (1) the importers. The most spectacular example of this hypothesis of low income-elasticity of demand for trend is China. raw materials, and (2) hypothetical asymmetries in the labour market. In the case of manufactured This trend might be a potential structural goods, the fruits of technical progress and change, where income is gradually overtaken increased productivity benefit both entrepreneurs by other factors such as population density – a and workers, through higher profits and wages, variable identified by Krausmann et al. (2008) whereas, for primary products, technical progress – in explaining world trade patterns. Densely translates into lower prices and lower wages populated countries increasingly appear as (see also Singer, 1950). This decline is rooted in net importers on world markets, while sparsely relative labour surpluses in developing countries, populated countries supply materials, irrespective which have greater difficulty in employing labour of their income levels (Figure 15). The material displaced from subsistence work in other sectors. volumes reallocated from low population density Southern countries were typically in close to high population density countries tripled exchange relations with the rich North and thus between 1980 and 2008.

36 cent of the resource-rich countries (which in in (which countries resource-rich of the cent 10 per consistently decades, three past the For balances. trade to physical correlation ahigh has it as patterns, trade of physical Source: ICMM(2006): ResourceEndowmentinitiative. Analytical Framework. 12 Bank) World Resource endowment (as measured by the Sources: (Dittrich,2012;World Bank,2012) Physical tradebalancesbycountrygroupaccordingtopopulationdensity Source: (Dittrich,2012);Assignationaccording toWorld Bank(2012). Countries’ physicaltradebalancesbyincomegroup,1980–2010 -4000 -3000 -2000 -1000 1000 2000 3000 4000 billion tonnes summary page/2905/resource-endowment-initiative-analytical-framework- Summary, development ofresource-richbutlow-andmiddle-income countries. better understandingtheimpactofminingactivities onthesocio-economic on Mining&Metals(ICMM), UNCTAD and The World Bank, withtheaimof CouncilThe ResourceEndowmentinitiativewassetupbytheInternational -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 1980 very sparselypopulated(lessthanhalfofglobalaveragepopulationdensity) sparsely populated(betweenhalfandaverageglobalpopulationdensity) densely populated(betweenglobalaverageandtwotimespopulationdensity) very denselypopulated(morethantwotimesglobalaveragepopulationdensity) world average(rightscale) million tonnes 1980 www.icmm.com ( 12 is another important determinant determinant important another is http://www.icmm.com/ 1990 1990 2000 2000 example of this. of example an is gas of shale exploitation The patterns. trade and extraction influence also to resources access as technological development and newfound such factors Finally, other of materials. exporters net were Latvia, or Guyana like countries, poor resource- rather some and importers, net were India, and US the China, as such countries, resource-rich most of the Some exceptions. remarkable afew are (Figure 16).markets There to global of materials suppliers net been have 15 countries) comprises numbers absolute 2010 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment Upper middleincome High income:nonOECD Low income Lower middleincome High income:OECD 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Figure 15 Figure 14 37 2.3 Is the organization of the world market still scaling with income levels, or are new patterns emerging? International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

Natural wealth (2005) and physical trade balances (2010), absolute terms Figure 16 Figure

Sources: (Dittrich, 2012; World Bank, 2012)

Infobox 2

Labour time embodied in trade The use of environmentally extended models has led to the recognition of the upstream labour required for traded products in the form of a ‘labour footprint’, as a significant theme. Human resources invested in labour can also be considered a natural resource. On the basis of the Eora MRIO Database, Alsamawi and colleagues (2014) have worked to establish both the employment and the wage footprint of nations, calculating the working hours (standardized to full-time employment equivalents) and the associated wages embodied in global imports and exports.

There are large differences between countries (and country groups, see Fig. X) with respect to the share of the domestic workforce engaged in exports production. In western industrial, Middle Eastern

2. Trade in resources and commodities and commodities in resources 2. Trade and Northern African (MENA), and Latin American countries (LACA), about 15 per cent of the workforce is engaged in exports production, whereas Asian and (ex)USSR countries employ 20-30 per cent of the domestic workforce in the same sector. In Sub-Saharan Africa, this share rises to 40 per cent in some cases. Foreign labour engaged in production for domestic consumption, however, follows a converse pattern: western industrial countries are sustained by 47 per cent foreign labour, while in Asian countries the figure is only 5 per cent.

This is explained by wage levels. Alsamawi et al. (2014, p. 64) illustrate the point:

”French people (average domestic wage US$ 50,000) smoke cigars that are manufactured in Poland (average domestic wage US$ 10,000), which, in turn, relies on raw material that is produced in Tanzania (average domestic wage US$ 170). Tanzania itself imports computers that are produced in China and designed in the United States. However, the volume of goods and the amount of labour embodied in those imported goods is not equivalent to the amount of exported labour and volume of exported goods. In 2010, approximately 500,000 labourers in Tanzania worked to support US consumption (earning US$215 million), whereas approximately 3,000 labourers in the United States worked for Tanzania (earning US$ 50 million). As an example of longer chains, U.S. citizens (average domestic wage US$ 58,000) wear clothes that are manufactured in China (average domestic wage US$ 2,700), woven from yarn in Pakistan (average domestic wage US$ 1,460) made with raw cotton from Tajikistan (average domestic wage US$ 450). The manufacture of a car in Germany may need the following:

38 International Trade in Resources: A biophysical assessment

copper from Chile (average domestic wage US$ 12,330) and Zambia (average domestic wage US$ 1,600); natural rubber or tyres from Indonesia (average domestic wage US$ 2,200); iron and aluminium from Brazil (average domestic wage US$ 10,170). … Each country makes use of a yet poorer one to deliver the imports needed to produce their exports.”

Figure 2.1 Labour embodied in countries‘ exports relative to their domestic workforce, and labour embodied in imports relative to the labour required for all domestic consumption (2008)

0,5 Source: calculated from data from Alsa- 0,4 mawi et al. (2014). Their data were gen-

0,3 erated on the basis of the EORA model (Lenzen et al., 2013) with labour time data 0,2 from LABORSTA (ILO, 2014). Accounting 0,1 unit: full-time employment equivalents 0 (employed and self-employed). Ordered Western (ex) USSR Asia MENA LACA SS Africa Industrial by country group according to Schaffartz- ik et al. (2014b). Work for exports/domestic workforce Labour Footprints of import/(domestic workforce + labour FP imports)

M. Simas and colleagues take a similar approach to calculating labour embodied in trade, generating indicators for labour and energy productivity that are dependent on a ‘territory-based’ and ’consumption-based’ calculation and exploring their implications for greenhouse gas emissions (Simas et al., 2014b). They also link domestic consumption to the exports and imports of what they term ’bad labour’. Indicators for bad labour include labour resulting in occupational health damage (accounted for in disability-adjusted life years (DALY)), vulnerable employment (employment without formal employment bonds), an under-representation of women in the workforce, a high proportion of low-skilled workers, child labour and forced labour. By using EXIOBASE, an extended MRIO model, Tukker et al. demonstrate that North America and OECD-Europe employ about as much foreign labour as domestic labour to satisfy domestic consumption, while all other world regions import much smaller shares or hardly any foreign labour (Tukker et al., 2014).

Figure 2.2 Employment footprint and selected ’bad labour’ footprints by world region (2010)

total employment footprint low skilled labor footprint 100 100

75 75

50 50

25 25

0 0 North Europe Europe Latin Asia Africa North Europe Europe Middle Latin Asia Africa Middle America OECD non OECD America Paci c America OECD non OECD America Paci c East East domestic share imports share domestic share imports share

occup. Health damage FP (Dalys) 100 source: (Simas et al., 2014a), extracted from table 75 2. Footprints are expressed as full-year, full-time

50 employment equivalents. The total employment footprint corresponds to the labour required to satisfy a 25 country’s consumption, either by domestic labour or by imports. 0 North Europe Europe Middle Latin Asia Africa America OECD non OECD America Paci c East domestic share imports share Labour footprints of ’bad labour’ are even more skewed: North America and OECD Europe import more low-skilled labour for health-damaging work than they employ domestically, while all other world emerging? patterns new or are still scaling with income levels, of the world market 2.3 Is the organization regions tend to employ domestic low-skilled labour for hazardous work, but import highly skilled labour for less hazardous work. In this way, global inequalities are also reflected in international trade. 39 Credit: Hans Splinter, flickr 3. Upstream resource

requirements of traded commodities

Sustained availability of natural resources is essential to overall human wellbeing. In a scenario of increasing demand for resources and, at the same time, accelerated depletion of those very resources, trade can contribute to supporting resource efficiency on a global scale. In principle, international trade allows an efficient allocation of production and extraction activities to regions with a large availability of resources and minimal resource intensity; this facilitates a reduction in economic costs, but possibly in environmental and social costs, too.

Foreign trade statistics only consider the mass masses, upstream flows provide insights into the or material flows of the goods at the time of overall physical dimension of trade. crossing state borders. However, there are The sum of materials traded and the associated additional materials used in the upstream upstream material requirements is calculated production process that remain at production under the term Raw Material Equivalents (RME) locations as wastes and emissions. These (Eurostat, 2013, 2009, 2001; OECD, 2008). additional materials, termed “upstream material requirements”, are extracted or harvested from In the Introduction, we explained how a product the natural environment and used in production, gets lighter in weight but becomes more valuable but are not physically transferred to the importing in its progress along the extraction-consumption country and hence no longer contribute to chain. A country engaged in exports experiences 13 the weight of the goods. Upstream material a steady depletion of its natural resources to requirements are also known as ‘materials provide resources to global markets. In doing so, of traded commodities requirements resource 3. Upstream embodied in trade’, ‘indirect flows’, ‘hidden flows’, the exporting country has to deal with wastes ‘virtual flows’ or ‘ecological rucksacks’. Indicators and emissions from primary processing, and for upstream resource requirements are expected may not be gaining high economic revenue. With to capture resource use along the production regard to this particular resource and the goods chain and allocate environmental burden to the derived from it, consumption-based indicators place of consumption. Beyond directly traded (such as RMC) will mark this country as having a light material footprint (MF): its inhabitants have 13 See Introduction for an explanation of how a product becomes lighter low levels of resource consumption. Production- in weight but more valuable during its progress along the extraction- consumption chain. based indicators, on the other hand, (such as

4141 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

42 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities The difference is much smaller for emerging emerging for smaller much is difference The trade. through use of material ‘outsourcing’ an implying trade, direct net than higher significantly to be imports of net requirements upstream found study the countries, industrialized Concerning of extraction. country the than other countries in demand final and activities trade with associated are materials extracted globally of all cent per al. et Wiedmann 2008. 1990 to period the covers and 186 countries model ( – a highly disaggregated and complex MRIO Eora using requirements, material upstream on study comprehensive global, of a results first al. 2013,In et Wiedmann Input-Output Multi-Regional extended approach (MRIO) trade: findings from studies using environmentally an 3.1 Wackernagel, and (Rees tradition footprinting the in hectares” “global as addressed been have requirements land 2003). Upstream (Hoekstra, used commonly is accounts’ water ‘virtual term the 2013). requirements, water upstream For al. et Peters 2009; 2011; al. et Davis 2010; Davis, and Minx, and Caldeira (Baiocchi advanced quite are emissions CO2 upstream calculating Studies resources. energy of (fossil) use by the caused emissions CO2 as or energy) either as energy resources used (in primary expressed be can requirements Energy traditions. follow their own terminological and methodological water, land and materials. compilations These energy, for compiled been have requirements resource upstream literature, existing the In governance. direct their under and territory their on happens by what to countries processes consumption and production in use resource attribute DMC) (like consumption material of direct Indicators justification. their have markers Both territory. its within burden environmental a substantial creating use, resource in high as country this mark will (DMC)) Consumption Material Domestic www.worldmrio.com Upstream material requirements of international , 2011; Peters, and Hertwich , 2011; Barrett, and Wiedmann (2013) 40 that revealed (2013) the published ) –, which includes includes ) –, which material footprint difference. difference. footprint material cent per 50 than amore is there respectively, Taiwan, and Slovakia Malta, Lithuania, Japan, 18). Figure (see Ireland, However, Cyprus, for by Tukker al. et studied countries 48 the 42 for of results similar present studies two The countries. 48 for land) and water carbon, as such resources other for footprints as (as well accounts footprint material to yield model, Input-Output al. by Tukker et published Astudy countries. other in demand final with associated are of extraction amounts significant since economies, extracting resource- for reverse the is trend The economies. life cycle inventories of products. the from coefficients using LCA-approach an and scale, aglobal on models of MRIO use the through approach input-output an trade: with associated use resource of upstream estimation the in used approaches main two are There literature. existing of the overview an give to below, we attempt sections the In compared. be easily cannot results Consequently, frames. time and definitions system different upon built on methods different or combinations thereof, these studies are not conclusive; they are based from However, findings decade. the past the in efforts research of intensive subject the been have requirements material upstream for accounting (HANPP; al. Haberl et Human Appropriation of Production Net Primary for –by accounting 1994) –indirectly as well as 14 two subchapters. following the in on we report which results, Infobox 1). The methods produce rather different 1, Section see details (for LCA-IO approaches “hybrid” to form combined are approaches (2014) uses EXIOBASE, another multi-regional multi-regional (2014) another EXIOBASE, uses to thisreport. on “Material Flow Accounts –methodsanddata” intheintroduction For andadescriptionofmethods, furtherinformation seethesection , 2007). Approaches , 2007). Approaches 14 These two two These (2014) (2014)

This study showed that emerging economies 1995 2005. and between economies emerging al. et by Wiebe done was study A similar Source: (Bruckneretal.,2012) Legend: HD=highpopulationdensity;LDlowdensity world in1995and2005,bypopulationdensity Raw materialtradebalancesbetweenOECDcountriesandtherestof while criteria, RME on importers to net be shown non-OECD countries, OECD countries were and of OECD balances trade the comparing al. et a2012In by Bruckner study reliability. in to gain expected be can results research future, near the that, in so teams, close collaboration the between various research is there and happening, are improvements Rapid of trade. materials of upstream to calculation the forneed methodological harmonization with regard a still is there that illustrate discrepancies These Sources: CREEA: Tukker etal.(2014);Eora:Wiedmann(2013) A comparisonofmaterialfootprintresultsfromEoraandCREEA 10 20 30 40 50 60 -6000 -4000 -2000 0 2000 4000 6000 RTB 1995and2005,inmilliontons

0 Australia Austria

OECD Belgium HD Brazil Bulgaria Canada

OECD China LD Cyprus

1995 CZ Denmark

ROW

HD Estonia Finland France (2012), (2012), Germany

ROW

LD Greece Hungary (2012) for for (2012) India Indonesia Ireland Italy Japan

OECD Latvia HD usually means net exports of natural resources. resources. of natural exports net means usually materials in balance trade Anegative balances. trade negative increasingly acquired well as materials to match global demand. of raw share largest the supplying region (ROW) populousless countries from the rest-of-the-world and materials of raw consumers large as emerging balances (RTBs), with populous OECD countries trade material raw on influence asignificant exerts density Population 1995 2005. and between increased contrast the that shows study The trade. direct than rather equivalents material of raw terms in measured are balances trade when pronounced more is of countries sets two the between contrast This exporters. net were countries non-OECD Lithuania Luxembourg Malta

OECD Mexico LD NL

2005 Norway Poland

ROW International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

HD Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia

ROW

LD Slovenia

South Africa

South Korea

Spain EORA biomass metals n.met.min. fossil fuels Sweden

Switzerland

Taiwan CREEA Turkey UK

USA

Figure 18 Figure 17 43 3.1 Upstream material requirements of international trade International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

44 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities

Figure 19 incorporated a large number of product LCAs. of product number alarge incorporated and structure IO detailed 2010) avery used 16 Germany on study A studies. case country-specific three to applied also was of trade equivalents material raw the to calculating approach hybrid The 15 flows. trade direct on based balances trade physical than exports) than imports (more positive more significantly are balances trade EU27, the that, for demonstrated material raw al. et of Wiedmann those Like fuels. fossil and products metallic for especially coefficients, LCA product-oriented other from or derived coefficients integrated also approach EU. of the The table Input-Output monetary the using requirements material upstream calculating study adopted a hybrid IO-LCA approach, Union.15 European of the The balances trade and consumption material raw of the a study (2012) colleagues and conducted have Schoer approaches IO Region national studies using hybrid IO approaches or Single- 3.2 time seriescovers2000–2007. andhencenocompetitiveproductionwasgiven.produced inGermany The a largenumberofproductLCAs(122)forthose goods, whichwerenot detailed IOstructure(120sectorsand3000products) andincorporated studystronglyechoestheEurostatmethodology.The German Itusedavery 2012, ontheEurostatwebsite(Eurostat2014). the EU27areavailableintimeseries, coveringtheperiodbetween2000and Eurostat, theEuropeanStatisticalOffice, commissionedthestudy. Resultsfor EU27 physicaltradebalance(PTB)andrawmaterial(RTB) million tonnes 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 -200 200 400 600 800 0 16 Upstream material requirements: from findings (Buyny al. et PTB

2000 R TB

, 2009; Buyny and Lauber, and Buyny , 2009; PTB

2005 (2013), results the R TB

PTB

2010 R TB

PTB

products of fossil fuel and metal goods. The The goods. metal and fuel of fossil products as a consequence of the 2009 economic crisis. economic 2009 of the aconsequence as 2010 2012, between and declined presumably then and 2005 and 2000 between increased requirements material of upstream imports net that showed study copper. The and steel, and iron gold, like metals for true particularly is This requirements. material of upstream amounts large on draw metals metals; and fuels of fossil imports net require countries EU27 hand, other the On consumption. and not required to European support production are regions or countries other from imports net that implying balanced, less or more is minerals non-metallic and too. biomass EU27 in trade categories, specific for available are Results 17 detailed, al. et (Schaffartzik Austria and 2013; 2009) Weinzettel, Kovanda, and Weinzettel and (Kovanda Republic Czech the on Studies

2012 some fossilfuelandmetalgoodsimports. products andsome15to20LCAcoefficientsused tocalculatetheRMEof Austria (Schaffartziketal., 2014a)coverIOtablesofaround50sectorsor The studiesontheCzechRepublic(Weinzettel andKovanda, 2009)andon R TB

17 with LCA coefficients integrating mainly mainly integrating LCA with coefficients Biomass (gross ores) Metal ores minerals Non-metallic materials/carriers Fossil energy , 2014a) less were 2014) Source: (Eurostat,

final consumption. final consumption. domestic for resources foreign fewer requiring is country the that implying declining, is Germany for RTB the contrast, In extent. to acertain least at demand, final domestic with associated use material outsourcing are countries two these that fact the underlines Republic Czech the and Austria 2013). for RTB in increase The Weinzettel, and Kovanda see Republic, Czech the on series atime (for rise aslight indicates Republic Czech the and Austria for balance trade material raw the whereas stable, fairly remain balances trade physical direct time, Across RTB. to ahigher contribute goods fuel-based fossil Austria, For products. metal of equivalents material raw to high the due mainly is imports net in increase the that fact the four material sub-categories highlight the along data disaggregated the Republic, Czech the and (RTB). Austria For equivalents material raw in measured balances trade for pronounced more becomes position this and (PTB), flows trade of direct terms in importers net as emerge Austria and Republic Czech the Germany, (2009); Austria:Schaffartzik etal.(2014a) Sources: Germany: Buynyetal.(2009)andBuyniLauber(2010);CzechRepublic:Weinzettel andKovanda Germany, theCzechRepublicandAustria Physical tradebalances(PTB)andrawmaterial(RTB)for 18 2003, for conducted was study Czech not beincludedinthiscomparison. However, detaileddatawerenotavailablefromthepublicationandsocould (Kovanda and Weinzettel, 2013)andfollowsthetrendsof Austrian RTB. The calculationofRMEfortheCzechRepublicisalsoavailableintimeseries 18 while the the while year 2003, using a single-region IO approach IO asingle-region using 2003, year the for US the Ecuador, and Mexico) Colombia, Chile, (Brazil, countries American Latin of several al. et Muñoz 2009 in regions, world to other focus the Shifting Austrian provides data for the years 1995 to years 2007. the for data provides Austrian 19 of the metal only. For every ton of direct metal metal ton of direct only. every For metal of the cent 1per around contains ore copper that fact the to with do has This 600. than of more factor by a exports net its increased of copper exports ofof its 1.5). equivalents Chile’s material raw afactor (by of Brazil 2) afactor (by and Colombia 21) of (Figure terms case the in Equivalents Material Raw in significantly volumes exports net boosted materials of biomass exports Increasing America. Latin in specialization export strong support land productive and endowment resource favourable density, Low population requirements. upstream and flows of direct terms in both of materials, exporters to net be countries American Latin showed study The applicable to, foreignproductionstructures. that thedomesticproductionstructureadequately represents, henceis domestic inter-industry relationsandtechnicalcoefficients andthusassumes In asingle-regionIOapproach, RMEofimportsarecalculated onthebasisof International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment (2009) calculated the RMEs RMEs the calculated (2009) 19 .

Figure 20 45 3.2 Upstream material requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

46 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities

Figure 21 flows since since flows 1962.In 2010,and (used upstream trade direct than faster increased have extraction) requirements (including used and unused Dittrich perspective 3.3 to Latin similar is of America States United The (i.e. importer). net positive to (i.e. exporter) net negative from shifts balance Mexico’s trade while balance, trade direct its with compared balance trade material raw alower in Ecuador, For results more. this even grown have imports for equivalents material raw but Mexico, and of Ecuador case the in terms RME in exports net in to increase an contribute exports fuel Fossil Source: (Muñoz flows of upstream the inflates which created, is rock of waste amount alarge therefore, export, American economiesandtheUSA(2003)inmilliontonnes Raw materialtradebalances(RTB)andphysical(PTB)forLatin et al. et Upstream material requirements from alife cycle (2012) upstream that estimated et al.,2009) the same period was about 70 billion tons. tons. 70 billion about was period same the al. et to Krausmann tons. According billion 44 around be unused) material requirements were calculated to highly positive. are materials upstream including imports its and imports net direct its both Consequently, imports. for power purchasing higher amuch with economy However, industrialized an is US the industry. heavy and production of primary share ahigh and endowment resource favourable density, population low extraction, material domestic to high respect with countries American 2008). Giljum, see adiscussion, (for exports these (2009), global material resource extraction in in extraction resource material (2009), global Sources: (Dittrich commodities Upstream materialrequirementsbycategoryoftraded of traded requirements material Upstream trade. in growth slower posted petroleum, like requirements, upstream low vegetable oils. In comparison, commodities with coal, and biomass-based products likepaper and copper,as hard such flows, upstream high with associated commodities of several trade the in growth rapid by the explained partly be can This 1980. in 2010, 3.7 with kilograms compared and 2005 in 4.3 kilograms of around rucksack kilogram of traded product an ecological carried one average, On themselves. goods traded of the growth the than higher much was goods traded for use material upstream in increase The sessment ofmaterialsembodiedintrade Sources: (Dittrich, 2010)fortheyears1962–2005and(Dittrich,2012)for2010;*countriesincludedinas- Direct tradeandupstreammaterialuseassociatedwithtrade,1962–2010 countries Number of 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 billion tonnes 1962 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 billion tonnes 0 5 1970 82 sum direct( wsim+ex)/2

1962 et al.,2012)fortheyears1962–2005; (Dittrich,2012)fortheyear2010 1975 112 1980

1970 1985

132 1975 1990 130 1995 sum materialsembodiedintrade((er-im+er-ex)/2) 1980 2000 110

1985 2005 et al., 2012). Dittrich also (see goods traded with associated flows upstream of all respectively, 9.6 cent, per 13.5, for 9.9 responsible and were copper. They and coal hard steel), and concentrates (as ores, in 2010 flows iron indirect were of associated shares highest the with 23). resources (Figure The coal hard in to trade relating mainly use, material (2010) 15 cent around for per upstream of all responsible only are trade, of direct terms in group since 1962. Fossil fuels, the dominant product goods traded all of flows indirect of the cent per 50 around for accounted have goods manufactured or semi-manufactured of ores, form the in metals, 111 2010

1990 125 in tradedbiomass materials embodied in tradedmetals materials embodied in tradedminerals materials embodied intradedfossilfuels materials embodied in otherproductstraded materials embodied

1995 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 161

2000 173

2005 148

2010

Figure 23 Figure 22 47 3.3 Upstream material requirements from a life cycle perspective International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

48 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities of water in the metabolic interface between between interface metabolic the of in water characteristic issues analytical several are There worldwidesecurity (McGlade al. et human and environmental with relationship ongoing its and change to climate susceptibility its of availability, water geography differential of the because trade, global and flows water between relationship the to establish important is water. It of virtual carriers important are products energy and industrial and products, livestock in social-metabolic processes. and Biomass of water source the on information important commodities’ in MFA terminology, provides of traded ‘water equivalent or water’ ‘virtual as known also products, in embedded flows water Thus, directly. traded rarely is it distances, large over to transport costly and heavy very is water However, flows. since material and metabolism of social concepts the as scale same the on system social of a out and into of flows water terms in consistency analytical holds use water such, As recreation. and to navigation production industrial and agricultural from ranging activities to human input water. a critical without also is It aweek last barely can body human the Indeed, Earth. on of life to sustenance the essential is that resource renewable abiotic, Water an is 3.4 material of upstream balances trade The chains. trade lengthy involve not does that source energy an as used mostly are fuels fossil because and metals, like flows waste large encompass not does fuels of fossil extraction the because flows, direct among than lower is fuels fossil with associated flows of upstream share The processing. this in fuels of fossil use the from resulting energy high the as well as processing metals in accumulated rock waste and extraction of unused amount high by the driven is products metal for share high The requirements. material upstream in or trade direct in either requirements, upstream significant carry not do minerals Non-metallic fuels. fossil and products by biomass followed requirements, upstream highest the embody Traded products metal Water embodied in trade , 2012). use clean, fresh water for its operations, and and operations, its for water fresh clean, use may system industrial an example, For context. asocio-metabolic in quality water for accounting when of contamination types to different use appropriately assigning levels of consumptive in arise Challenges analyses. use water in for account to difficult often is contamination but usability, its of determines water quality The contamination.” or sink, to asaline seepage to evaporation, to losses steam, conversion through as such basin, same the in re-use for unavailable made and asource from withdrawn to water refers “typically (2003), which Gleick from taken use, consumptive of definition the we use report, of this purpose the For useful. longer no considered is it before activities human multiple serve can water Furthermore, sources. available from water withdraw that systems irrigation from or moisture soil local and rainfall from either of water, evapotranspiration the on rely hand, consumption. Agricultural systems, on the other actual no but of flow water range a certain requires that use in-stream an entails example, of water ‘use’. for navigation, definitions River different the outset, the from to understand, essential is it activities, human myriad serves water Because environment. the and society countries. to exporting burden environmental the shift countries net-importing while activities, processing and to extraction relating pressures countries experience increased environmental net-exporting costs, of environmental terms In followed by Asia. imports, indirect and direct largest the had Europe flows. trade indirect and of direct balance net positive America’s North for responsible are fuels fossil imported of directly amounts large The period. observed the in year every for not though exporters, net also are Africa and America North America. by Latin followed exports, net indirect (including Oceania) had the highest direct and al. et Dittrich imports. high with those and exports high with requirements differentiate between regions (2012) demonstrated that Australia (2012) Australia that demonstrated Source: (Allan, 1996a) Estimates ofwateruseandavailabilityintheMENAregion (km kilometres 1.4 billion cubic about at fixed is atmosphere) the (including Earth of on water stock The Earth’s hydrosphere. the of in water cycling of the context the within studied be should consumption Finally, water concept. this handle literature the in methods various how discuss will below sections The resources. water local on demands cooling purposes, without additional making for wastewater of that use secondary make could plant power thermoelectric downstream a but contexts, domestic or agricultural in water of the use further prevents contamination The watershed. intolocal a toxic effluents release any change in the Earth’s overall water stock. stock. water Earth’s the overall in change any entail not does but issues, distributional raises therefore and flows, into hydrospheric intervention consumption through human activities implies an natural and anthropocentric drivers. Thus water with some seasonal regularity, influenced by highly differentiated geographically, but occur (Trenberth flows, amounting to about 500 km 500 about to amounting flows, precipitation, groundwater recharge and aquifer transpiration, evaporation, through flows water energy drives the hydrologic cycle, which involves et al. et , 2007). These processes are are processes , 2007). These 3 ). sun’s The 3 per year debates and future applications in this field. this in applications future and debates years, and a discussion on current methodological twenty past the in water, results main the virtual to measure used methods the on details provide we sections following the In sustainability. and globalization of issues broader and flows water of virtual science the with concerned more are and products of traded range abroader consider regions. between differences studies These of productivity advantage by taking use water global of overall impacts the reducing in trade water of virtual role of the study the been has theme water. second The virtual quantifying of science precise the with than trade of food economy political the with more concerned were and scholarship, water of virtual chronology the in earlier place took generally studies These level. sub-national or national the at often most scarcity, water to atool alleviate as water of virtual study the is One themes. central two around revolved has studies, resulting the and interest, of this thrust The policymakers. and economists scientists, among years recent in asurge seen has which trade, water virtual on section discusses the relevant scientific literature of this remainder the mind, in issues these With International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Figure 24 49 3.4 Water embodied in trade International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

50 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities

Figure 25 1990s (Allan, 2002, 1998, 1997,1990s (Allan, 1996b). the By late the throughout water of virtual option “economically invisible, politically silent” policy the called he to what promote continued Allan 24). (Figure demand growing of light in scarcity water domestic for mechanism coping important to an be found was grains, food of water, form the in mostly of virtual import The (Allan, 1996a). countries MENA among conflict of resource absence apparent the for explanation water’, an ‘virtual as term the coined having with credited is Tony Allan Allan. geographer British by the region (MENA) Africa North and East Middle the in development water-constrained on 1990s, to studies to early the back traced be can water of virtual concept The light. this in explicitly studied been not has systems larger in water (e.g. 1965), Wolman, of virtual role the cities like systems social to smaller respect with to water, especially pertained metabolism social on writings early some Although Scarcity Virtual Water Trade to Alleviate argued consistently from an economic standpoint standpoint economic an from consistently argued (2011a,Wichelns 2011b, 2010, 2001) 2004, has water resources Patterns ofchangeinpercapitanetcerealimportversusavailable (Figure 25) al. (Yang et (Figure domestic from demand growing populations to address grains, of food form the in water virtual of imports their increased resources financial strong with (1980-2000), countries decades two previous the over that (2002) showed Zehnder study, Yang their and Through Asia. and Africa in countries the to later all Zehnder, 2002) and (Yang and countries Mediterranean southern six to advantage) to comparative (analogous thesis endowment water the applied also Zehnder Yang China. and within scarcity regional on decisions into water planning of virtual integration applicable at the sub-national level, arguing for (2001) Yang strategy the Zehnder and found trade. water virtual in engage countries of why explanation agood –was literature the in country of a “endowment” water to the as referred –often sources water renewable domestic, that evidence statistical initial some provided and countries, African southern of four regimes trade product to agricultural the concept the strategy’. water (2001) Earle of ‘virtual applied applications and aspects different studying begun had authors other several 2000s, early a region’s or a country’s trade flows. In his 2001his In flows. trade a region’s acountry’s or explaining in water of virtual primacy the against , 2003). , period. former tothelatter countries from thet of thepositions indicate movements rows inthediagram od 1996–2000.Ar the investigationperi- names are thefitsfor circles withcountry solid curveand 1980–1984, and investigation period variable onlyforthe model withthewater cles are thefitsof curve andopencir Legend: Dashed Zehnder, 2007) Source: (Yang and

- - Source: (Hoekstra andHung,2005b) culated astheratioofnetvirtual waterimportintoacountrytothetotalnationalappropriation. Legend: Water scarcity isdefinedastheratiooftotalwateruseto availability;waterdependencyiscal- (1995–1999) Water dependencyversuswaterscarcityforallcountriesintheworld attempt to first the when 2002, since significantly increased has water into virtual of inquiry scope water. The virtual of quantification rough their and in both their contextual geographic applications limited were they flows, trade in factor explanatory an and astrategy both as water virtual for Although these initial studies laid the foundations of criteria. set greater of a context the in understood be must theory advantage comparative that and insufficient are hydrologic indicators such as water endowment for correlation meaningful in policy prescription, that, argued but standpoint, analysis descriptive a from water of virtual concept of the value the acknowledged Wichelns papers, later In 2009). al. et (Fraiture strategy water virtual of the anti-thesis apparent an endowment, of high to areas endowment of low areas from flows actually water virtual cases, some that, in observations from later studies, which showed explain helped This trade. and of use water determinants of water, significant also were of agricultural policies on farmers’ valuation influence the as labour, well as and land as such factors, other that demonstrating regime, trade water Egypt’s virtual discussed he article,

Water dependency (%) 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 0 10 Netherlands USA Portugal Italy 20 Japan China India 30 Korea Rep. et al. et , 2004; Verma Lebanon South Africa Germany Spain Syria Singapore 40 Belgium-Lux Algeria Morocco Water scarcity(%) 50 Iran , 60 T unes being used. used. being already are resources water acountry’s which to degree actual the into account takes which to it scarcity, water relate Hung and Hoekstra whereas to endowment, imports water virtual related works However, works. earlier earlier in emphasised thesis strategy water to virtual the back referred 26). results The (Figure water virtual imported on relies acountry to which extent the as dependency,” “water defined and scarcity for to indicators respect with continents and regions, world nations, for balances water virtual provides also report The use. water of total global 13 (Gm3/y), about or per cent year per kilometres cubic 695 about to amounted total flows that 1995 from to 1999 of crops found form and in the flows water virtual global 2002) averaged 2005a, Hung, and (Hoekstra Hung and Hoekstra since. ever studies water virtual in used repeatedly been have that products, provided the basic calculation methods industrial or animal-based omitting and crops to 2002), agricultural Hung, limited and (Hoekstra report The Netherlands. the in Water Education for Institute the at undertaken was world of the countries all between flows water virtual calculate i 70 a Pakistan 80 Egypt 90 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 100 110 Jordan 120

Figure 26 51 3.4 Water embodied in trade International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

52 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities

Figure 27 consumption ratio exceeds 30 per cent include include cent per 30 exceeds ratio consumption to import net whose countries Notable imports. from water of consumptive cent per 30 than less derive 53 countries, importing water virtual net 94 approximately the cent). Among (56 per Australia and cent) cent), (50 Côte per d’Ivoire (48 per cent), Argentina per (33 cent), Canada per (30 Kazakhstan include extraction domestic of shares largest the export that countries The use. consumptive for extraction of domestic cent per 30 than less of were water exports net group), exporters water net of the cent per (83 countries exporting water virtual 66 among that 2011) Hoekstra, and (Mekonnen demonstrate Hoekstra and Mekonnen from Statistics Source: (Mekonnen andHoekstra,2011).Onlythebiggestgross flows(>15Gm3∕y)are shown. the in country every nearly for goods of traded flows) water (virtual requirements water upstream (2011) Hoekstra and Mekonnen calculated such. as studied be should and phenomenon aglobal clearly is trade water virtual that acknowledged was it to literature, the contributions important still were assessments regional While further. developed it as field, the define helped that convergence analytical water, some also but of virtual application the on of perspectives of arange evidence provide 2003) (Hoekstra, Water Trade. proceedings The Virtual on Meeting Expert International the at 2002 in addressed were others, many and topics, These related totradeinagriculturalandindustrialproductsovertheperiod1996–2005 Virtual waterbalancepercountryanddirectionofgrossvirtualflows products only. products only. industrial and crop,1996 for animal to 2005 from averages show statistics These share. largest the for accounting cent) (78 per Kingdom United the with countries, European most and cent) (67 per (57 cent), Japan Korea per South Australia. and Asia, South-East and South as well as America, South and North in are exporters water virtual largest The importers. important most the as emerging Mexico and Korea, South Japan, with importers, water virtual net are countries African North and Eastern, Middle European, Most perspective. conditionsand bio-geographical add another climatic but studies, flow material from results to similar are patterns found.. Country-specific 2011, not source 27Error! Reference Figure Hoekstra, and Mekonnen in shown are flows bilateral major and year per import water virtual net Average 2005. 1996 and between world international trade, global water savings can be be can savings water global trade, international through linked are countries When efficiency. that distort or control that factors as well as system, production global overall of the efficiency water the considers of research body This Use Global Water Virtual Water TradeReduce to For global water efficiency, it would be desirable desirable be it would efficiency, water global For savings. water blue and water green between al. et by Fraiture indicated initially aspect, 2010). Döll, and important Another Yang, and Liu 2010; al. et Rost al. et (Fader variables explicit spatially more to characterize efforts modelling to several rise gave of crops content surrounding water the virtual uncertainties of ways. The anumber in studies initial of the methodology the on to improve attempted has trade water virtual global on work Subsequent data. limited are there which level), for field at the or excess (water deficit factors production crop world to real sensitive analysis, showing that calculations are highly flows water virtual global in analyses uncertainty first the attempt also authors The km3. 336 to amounted savings water virtual that finding 1997–2001, over averaged types of crop array of abroader trade water virtual the analysed but Yang by al. 2000. et km3 to 450 zero over almost from steadily increased 1961 since to have savings of global trajectory the calculating perspective, long-term the take and barley) and soy meat, (including of products set abroader (2004) include Kanae and Oki needed. is it where water up to free unlikely is it future, the in increases trade global as and, endowment water than other reasons for place takes that of trade aby-product mostly are savings that to 112 be however, caution, authors The km3. 1995 in products cereal in to trade related savings al. et Fraiture mid-2000s. in the efficiency use water global of notion the exploring began authors Several environment. the or sanitation drinking, as such needs, immediate more for water up frees amounts to global savings, which theoretically savings country-level Aggregating (productivity). ratio input yield-to-water the affect which climate, soil or fertility production technologies, in of differences result the potentially are savings domestic production of the same product. The would than use water lower in results a product of import the when occur trade through savings water Virtual productivity. water in differences of geographical optimization by the facilitated (2004) calculated global water , 2011; al. et Hanasaki (2006) omitted meat, meat, omitted (2006) (2004), is the difference (2004), difference the is , 2008; Siebert Siebert , 2008; , 2010; endowments of trading partners. of trading endowments water by the latently only determined are that of factors” of “services example an as it by situating concept, economic acceptable an as water virtual to establish attempted has (2012)Reimer recently, More conflict. to reduce and endowment to according benefits resource water to redistribute potential the has trade water virtual that claims to refute model Ohlin Heckscher- the by applying theory, advantage comparative with integrated insufficiently being 2011a,(Wichelns, 2011b, water 2010) of virtual critique (2010) Wichelns’ Ansink endorsed network. of the formation changing the in agreements trade like factors political-economic contributory to identify al. et 1986(Dalin since network trade water virtual of the evolution the tracing al. et of Konar modelling the on build networkecological analysis. al. Dalin et al. et Yang scenarios. climate-change under penetrate, to countries water-scarce for difficult increasingly be will clusters These clusters. trade forming countries water-endowed with model, hierarchical a on operates network trade water virtual the that established have theory’, authors the network a more formal predictive model. Using ‘complex al. et Konar difficult. transfer water virtual dynamic make that interdependencies to locked-in the owing resilience, lower in resulted also has but water virtual via benefits short-term provided drought. The authors concluded that globalization as such to shocks resilience to long-term test order in network, trade water virtual of the model D’Odorico al. et system. trade water virtual of the logic and structure the refined further have and perspective acritical adopted have authors Several rain-fed than for irrigated production. for required were land occur, more if could off Zehnder, 2007).and However, trade- apotential al. et (Aldaya countries importing in use water (blue) to irrigation save and agriculture water) (green rain-fed on more to rely countries exporting for , 2010; Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2008; Yang 2008; Hoekstra, , 2010; and Chapagain (2011) al. et Suweis and (2012) came to similar conclusions, using (2010) developed a simple (2010) asimple developed International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , (2011) developed have , 2012, 28), Figure (2011), (2011), (2012) (2012) 53 3.4 Water embodied in trade International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

54 3. Upstream resource requirements of traded commodities

Figure 28 the large difference betweentotalVWTin1986(A;259km regions (colourschemegivenbottomleft).Thecircles are scaledaccording tothetotalvolumeofVWT. Note intermediate goods between countries, together together countries, between goods intermediate of more trading the as such increased, have general in activities trade Secondly, trade. of total share increasing an represent goods Firstly, higher-processed requirements. upstream in growth the influenced have factors Different methodology of accounting used for calculations. of the irrespective rise, the on generally are of trade requirements resource upstream The commodities 3.5 for criterion a realistic being from far is and perspective apolicy from application limited have may strategy This development. and expansion population from stemming demand rising the with coped have regions and countries water-stressed how in factor explanatory partial, only if strong, to a proved be has water Virtual 20 years. last the over water of virtual study the in maturation of atrail provide developments ongoing These Legend: NumbersindicatethevolumeofVWTinkm Source: (Dalinetal.,2012) Virtual waterflowsbetweenthesixworldregions Conclusions upstream on requirements of traded 3 , andthecoloursoflinkscorrespond totheexporting 3 ) andin2007(B;567km consumption of fossil energy carriers for fuelling fuelling for carriers energy of fossil consumption increasing The good. ton of tradable per inputs energy and material higher require they since commodities, these for requirements upstream Chapter 4.3), (see raise fuels fossil for (EROEI) investment energy on returns energy declining as well as minerals, industrial and metals for grades ore declining time, same At the satisfied. is demand final before transport, additional the with global economy. the and hydrosphere the between interaction the for descriptor important an provide flows trade water virtual that indicates generally, literature, the Nevertheless, systems. trade optimizing 20 use inaglobal “green economy”. (McGlade the Working Groupon Water Resource EfficiencytotheInternational Panel” The UNEPreport “Measuring wateruseinagreeneconomy, A Reportof et al., aboutmeasuringwater 2012)providesfurtherinformation 20 3 ) high-consumption) countries and low-income (and high-income between requirements resource of upstream distribution international the in difference apronounced is There production in processes the global economy. and of extraction allocation better a potentially by achieved use resource in decline possible any outweigh may factors These trade. in embodied water” in increases and corresponding “virtual of crops imports increasing require regions growth and increasing food in demand arid upstream requirements. Finally, population in growth driving factor another is transport yield new insights in the coming years. years. coming the in insights new yield could materials, for particular in requirements, of upstream analysis the in developments rapid However, considered. are requirements material upstream when apparent longer no are exports, net in specializing countries i.e. industrialized years, recent in patterns trade to direct Changes century. 20th the in prevalent were that patterns trade direct of the aprolongation this, through developing and, and emerging economies to countries high-income from processes of resource-intensive externalization increased flows. to point trade toTrends direct relating that than greater is difference This countries. International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 55 3.5 Conclusions on upstream requirements of traded commodities Credit: Jimmy Harris, flickr textiles. Human nutrition continues to be the to the be continues nutrition Human textiles. as such of fibres out made goods durable more other and paper purposes, construction for used timber as such stocks societal in wastes. Only a negligible fraction accumulates CO2) solid or (mostly emissions into gaseous transformed and split chemically food, animal or human as year one within i.e. consumed is it economy, the through aflow mostly is Biomass land. harvest with linked closely is extraction hence biomass, of uses socio-economic of the most up makes biomass Plant-based animals. (wild) hunted and timber by livestock, grazed biomass harvests, (e.g. by-products straw), grassland harvest animals. This includes agricultural products, hunted as well as nature from extracted origin of plant materials raw all comprise that resources renewable to the be considered are materials Biomass life. human sustaining for useful output the 1993), (Boserup, maximizing thus ones systems into increasingly human-dominated terrestrial natural of converting history a long have societies and interaction of society-nature interface very the at is of resources Availability including land-use 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, environmental impacts impacts environmental 4. Trade type flows by of resource and their (FAO, 2010). This area includes a wide range (FAO, 2010). range awide includes area This 2010 in area total land forested of the was 31 per cent assessment, resource forest latest (FAO, of pastures cent 2012). to FAO’s According 26 per and of croplands 12 consisting cent per with agriculture, for use in was surface land global cover/use:land 2010, in total of the cent per 38 for accounts in the reflected is This role. a central playing production food with use, land of human productionBiomass the comprises largest share are recorded. leather, etc.,eggs, milk, fish, meat, as such commodities, including animal-based products traded all exports, and imports biomass for GDP. with accounting In correlation aweak only biomassbetween use and population figures, but correlation astrong plots nutrition for of biomass decades, energy provision. The fundamental role recent in increasingly and, purposes, construction for and production industrial for materials raw significantuses of biomassmaterials include waste). food as Other up ends one-third which (of food of human form the takes indirectly or directly extraction of biomass three-quarters use socio-economic of biomass.primary Around 57 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

58 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts biomass extraction (Zika and Erb, 2009). and (Zika extraction biomass 1994), (UNCCD, potential limit can activities by human caused land of the capacity productive reduction or loss in the biological or economic i.e. any degradation, Land contamination. pesticide and eutrophication degradation, soil capacity, storage carbon of biomass loss loss, provision of biomass: for instance, biodiversity the and land-use with associated directly are impacts environmental pressing most of the number Alarge exhaustion. or scarcity than to biomass threat direct amore is species, of to extinction the lead can which Overuse, 40 per cent. around at higher, standing much is fraction this metals, and fuels fossil groups, material two other the For (DE). amounts extracted of the 8 per cent only for accounting importance, minor of is trade land, from extracted total biomass the However, to relation in significant. still cent), but (20 per metals and cent) per (40–50 fuels fossil of that than lower is biomass in trade globe, the around traded of materials cent of 15–20 per ashare With undertaken. are weeds, and crops into intervention and fertilization, irrigation, as massive, costly colonization measures, such unless all, at output biomass any produce hardly can land of low-quality area same the but cropland can produce food for a large family, productivity. For example, one hectare of fertile land and availability land in to differences owing globe. However, production is concentrated, the over all extracted be can they as abundant, to be considered are materials Biomass al. (Bringezu et report land to UNEP the according cent, 2 per al. global (Schneider land et surface of the cent 0.5 per about cover currently areas or marginal grasslands. Urban and infrastructure deserts as such quality, of low typically is area land global of the 31 cent per remaining The 2010 in forest (FAO, of primary up 2010).made was land of forest one-third about just humans: however, by forests, used lion’s is of these share The forests. primary tropical to dense cover tree of 10 amere percent with areas from of lands, , 2014). , 2009) or or , 2009) animal biomass. to plant from conversion of the because a given, are of “processing” stages early the in “losses” through ploughing. As for animal products, high soil into the reintegration for field the on left fodder, or else or material bedding as used are 2003). (FAO, chain production the along wastes biotic based biomass materials results in minimal of plant- processing the to minerals, contrast In approach. to HANPP the unique is products in MFA studies, the second component of biomass requirements to total material the relating calculations way in asimilar in included is harvest) through (extraction component first the While areas. of settlement building the like land, of the productivity ecological in changes comprehensive way as well as human-induced approach includes harvested biomass in a The presence. human the without system areference in value to ahypothetical compared are activities harvest after production primary of net To levels so,practices. do prevailing availability in ecosystems through land-use by measuring human alteration to biomass intensity land-use cover. indicates land HANPP and of land-use types different across aspects intensity land-use such to include a framework productionprimary (HANPP) indicator presents grassland. The human appropriation of net extensive an versus cropland managed intensely of an example, for think, by humans; intensities varying at managed be can land that fact the obscure can systems natural on impact of human ameasure as area land Using 21 tons. to 21 billion increased had use biomass 2010, By use. material of all 75 per cent al. et 1900 (Krausmann in tons 5billion at stood use biomass Global provision. energy and construction for as well as of nutrition asource as by societies, used resource major the still was 1900,In biomass Direct tradeflows supply (consumption)data(FAO, 2001). economies (Gustavssonetal., 2011), aretypicallyincludedinnationalfood Household-level foodwastes, whichcanbeover30%percentindeveloped 21 Many by-products or potential wastes wastes potential or by-products Many , 2009), which represented represented , 2009), which countries with the highest extraction are China China are extraction highest the with countries (now cent). 37 at Individual to per Asia shifted activities extraction while respectively) cent, 5per and (to cent 25 per slightly decreased countries USSR former and of OECD dominance 2010, cent). By (2 per Africa relative the North and East (10 Middle the each), and cent per USSR (14 former the and cent), Africa per America Latin per cent), (30 by Asia followed 2010 countries of OECD group the in extracted was biomass of all cent 40 per plete intermsofcountryandcommodity, andhaveabettercoveragethanimports. Source: (Dittrich, 2012);note:tradeisbasedonexports, becauseexportstatisticsofbiomassare more com- Trade inbiomassbymainsub-category,1980–2010 23 22 0.4 cent. to per only amounting extraction, to total biomass compared (11 per cent). small, timber relatively is catch Fish and cent) (26 per biomass cent), grazed (6 per crops by fodder leaves), followed beet and straw mainly cent, (20 per etc.) residues crop and fruits, roots, vegetables, cereals, cent, (36 per major share of biomass used crops comprises still biomass comprise materials. different The their composition chemical [hydrocarbons] but of terms in homogeneous are materials Biomass cent. to per 30 use total material reduced has importance relative its in However, adecrease 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 200 400 600 800 [million tonnes] The 2010groupofOECDcountries (Eurostat, 2013, p. 201). used forfeedingtheseanimalsisaccountedasbiomassextraction considered partofthesocio-economicsystem, sothatonlythebiomass Other biomass, fromlivestockoraquaculture, arebydefinition In MFA, onlyfishcatchandhuntingareconsideredinbiomassextraction. 0 1980 22 In 1950, not far short of 1950, In short far not 1990 23 (35 per cent), (35 per 2000 same period. same period. the during respectively, cent per +363 and cent of +429 per increase above-average an witnessed catch fish and preparation meat meat, in trade level, disaggregated cent). At amore per (+160 cent), wood per (+146 food and cent) per (+272 feed in (+262by trade cent), animals per 1980 2010), and between (+352 per cent followed in products made mainly from biomass trade in found be can increases highest The (8.7 per cent). products animal-based and animals (17.5products (9.7 per cent) and cent), feed per 25.7 perat 2010, in cent by forestry followed share, highest second the held beverages, and Products made from biomass, including paper 2010. in 22.6 cent) of per cereals: (share 47.3 per cent around reaching decades, three past the in biomass traded in share highest the held consistently has cereals, particular in Food, 1980 to 1,721 2010 in tons million (+168 cent). per 641 in tons from million increased trade Biomass 1950 from to2010) 2012). per cent +330 (Dittrich, by +150 perincreased 1980 from to 2010 cent (or use and extraction biomass global Overall, cent). (5 per Union Soviet former the and cent) (10 (9 per each), USA the cent Brazil per and India extraction), (14 biomass of global cent per 2010 food-, plant-based products animals andanimal feed and processed forestry products,primary biomass materials products mainlyfrom International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Figure 29 59 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

60 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 30 highest net of demanders biomass products. the as (29 ranked Mt) are Kingdom United the (79 (40 Mt), (37 Mt), Korea Mt) Mexico and South (150 Mt). (39 China Federation Mt), Japan Russian the Mt) and (78 (66 Mt), Canada Argentina (176 US the are of biomass Mt), (99 Mt), Brazil suppliers net PTB), largest the balance, trade physical as (measured trade ofMt). net terms In (60 (70 Italy Mt) and Mt),(90 Netherlands the Mt), (98 (97 US (205 the Mt), Mt), Germany Japan in 2010biggest demanders/importers were China (67 Mt). The Federation (81 Russian the Mt) and (92 Mt), Mt), (86 Argentina France Germany as (273 (114 Mt), Brazil Mt), (98 Mt), well as Canada 2010, in US the total exports in include measured as suppliers, biggest the level, At country Source: (Dittrichetal.,2012) and Europe. distribution This geographical follows by Africa tons, followed 225 with million importer, net dominant the by far was Asia Oceania. and America by Latin followed 2008, in tons million 246 with of biomass, supplier net largest the was 31). (Figure America countries North American North and by Asian inner-EU-trade), followed to owing reasons, other (among countries European among highest was exports, and imports for trade, of biomass total volume The -800 -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 800 million tonnes 0 Biomass-based commoditytradebetweencountries,bycontinent,2008 Africa Asia Europe 51 to 121 Mha Mha. to 10 17 cent from from or per cent, per increased total global the within trade to international linked 1961 from that of cropland to share 2007 the show products) of animal consumption and for vegetal food items (i.e. excluding production al. et Kastner from to Data trade. linked HANPP and areas on impact the mitigated and period this during well, as increased, yields crop However, systems. land-use on trade international (FAO, of 2012)), impact increasing of the evidence 1961 from cent, to 2per 2009 versus 4 per cent of rates growth annual (average production has grown faster considerably than biomass it that show trade direct in Temporal trends example. for countries, African some in witnessed as patterns, trade and production etc., influence conflicts, to technology, access infrastructure, transportation as such factors, other Additionally, for large-scale biomass production and exports. available labour and area to land have appear countries density population low whereas demand, domestic to satisfy imports biomass population usually require density additional of high countries density; of population patterns America Latin America North Oceania (2012) (2012)

Export Import nevertheless much lower than for upstream upstream for than lower much nevertheless al. et (Bruckner cent by 20 per grew requirements 1970. for cent biomass 4per and Upstream 2010 for cent to 7per reduced proportionately is fraction traded the demand, foreign final satisfy to traded is total extraction of the apart only that However, good. considering consumption afinal in used are materials biomass the before deliveries multiple for accounts thus and system production the in uses intermediate for trade includes also However, figure included). this not use (intermediate demand foreign to satisfy –redistributed indirectly or –directly is extracted globally materials biomass of all cent 25that per al. et (Bruckner cent 25 per to increased to trade related indirectly or directly materials of biomass share the considered, are 1970. in requirements cent material upstream If to 10 per compared traded, was extraction materials 2010,In biomass of 15 global cent per approaches) (IO-based biomass materials Upstream requirementsof Source: (Dittrich, 2012) countries Physical biomasstradeofthetop10net-importingandnet-exporting , 2012), which is a significant rate but , 2012),ratebut asignificant is which , 2012). means This et al. et Muñoz (see considered are requirements upstream when so, more even significantly; increased have exports net Their markets. to global exporters biomass important are countries American Latin (+45 cent). per fuels fossil and cent) (+60 per minerals construction (+90 cent), per minerals industrial and metals as such categories material of other requirements (Schoer al. et trade biomass thus and materials of biomass in terms self-sufficient considered is Europe that implying pattern, the change not does RME as respect to biomass goods. Recalculating trade with trade physical balanced less or a more has hand, other the on Union, European The of 1.5 afactor and Brazil). for Colombia 2 for of afactor (by doubled less or more materials, volumes,export comprising mainly biomass example, Muñoz al. et for Brazil, and of Colombia case the In exports. their specialization in biomass production and endowment, such as productive land, support resource favourable and density Low population , 2012). International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment et al. et Wiebe , 2009; (2009) showed that net net that showed (2009) , 2012).

Figure 31 61 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

62 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts 24 the results, processed when biomass products affect greatly will choice allocation the of this, view In industry. paper the for residues wood sawdust/ and production, meat for feed livestock as bran and cakes oil as such uses, other for inputs valuable are processes production the of by-products the cases, most In respectively. produced, are furniture and bread oil, soy From these, wood. or wheat, soybeans, as such parts valuable of commercially harvest report statistics Official biomass. for accounts based of consumption- results affects greatly products to primary goods processed of allocating method The of accounting. areas some in challenges requirements for biomass trade pose significant upstream and 35). trade However, biomass al. et (Dittrich 2005” in rucksacks ecological of tons around million and 1,344 flows of tons direct 24 million nearly in resulting 2005, 1970 between of 30 by afactor and increased oil palm with trade “Direct oil. palm particular in oils, and fats vegetable include process production upstream the in of materials amounts higher calculation). products Biomass that require this in extraction unused as included is erosion al. biomass goods et (Dittrich traded with associated are requirements material upstream of all cent 25 per almost Currently, products. of biomass production the in used materials all for accounting in comprehensive are they approach, As LCA methodologies apply a product-based used. etc. also are buildings, agricultural and sites, non-metallic minerals for building roads metals contained and in production machinery fertilizers, producing for fuels fossil agriculture, industrial in machinery and tractors fuelling for carriers energy fossil as such materials In the production of biomass goods, other approach) biomass goods(LCA-based requirements forproducing upstream Other material system boundariesdiffer. makes itdifficulttorelateitsresultsdirecttrade ordomesticextraction, as component thathasbeenusedfortheproduction ofthecommodity), which The LCAapproachreferredtohereincludesunused extraction(forevery 24 , 2012; note that , 2012, p. through FAO. For example, the amount of green of green FAO. amount through the example, For available products, crop specific for statistics yield and production through flows trade biomass to related be can requirements water Crop CROPWAT model. FAO’s example for requirements, water crop blue and green estimating for exist models Several conditions. growing other and climate location, to crop, according differ requirements water Crop requirement.” water “crop its called is cycle aplant’s productive through of consumed water total amount the and evapotranspiration, entails purposes. production Biomass necessarily productive other for used be still can consumed not is that water withdrawn indicator, since appropriate more the as use consumptive on focus studies most products, traded in use water to embodied comes it When 2000). (Shiklomanov, cent) per (85 use consumptive and cent) per (66 withdrawal water of both share largest the Globally, the agricultural sector accounts for 2006). Rockström, and (Falkenmark of water use in global agricultural production 75 cent for per accounting consumption, human water dominates global biomass production for production, as in irrigated agriculture. Green groundwater that is physically applied to biomass or surface is water” “blue Secondly, agriculture. rain-fed in as production, biomass in directly used is that moisture soil and precipitation the is water” Firstly, “green sources. into two purposes, analytical for divided, be can and production, biomass for input Water anecessary is biomass products requirementsof Upstream water underestimated. greatly be will inputs, vital are cakes oilseed which for products, of animal impact actual the cake, to oilseed the none and oil to soybean assigned is land-use all if instance, for problematic: be can approach latter product”. The “main called to aso- impact all assigning or content matter dry value, monetary on instance, it, for basing use approaches different for this allocation, studies Existing land-use. and requirements upstream products, to primary linked are resource consumption are always “embodied”. to linked foreign, or domestic resources, land that Studies that make land resources embodied in in embodied resources land make that Studies 26 25 either internationally or domestically. physically, traded be cannot aresource as Land land area Distribution ofproductive communities. LCA footprint the water and within debate much of subject to the be continues represent volumes flow these that impacts environmental and social However, contextualizing the on-the-ground 2002). Hung, and (Hoekstra importer net largest the being Asia and exporter net largest the being America North with flows, trade biomass direct of to patterns correspond generally trade water of embodied patterns the to expected, is be As on the methods used and the assumptions made. 2012), Mekonnen, and (Hoekstra depending km3 al. et (Dalin 567 km3 from range products agricultural of traded requirements water of total upstream estimates Recent trade. inembodied global trade, biomass particularly of water volumes the to estimate decade, past the over endeavoured, have researchers of 3.4, anumber Section in discussed As volume per mass basis. on a coefficients water embodied high extremely giving products, to livestock the attributed often are forage and of fodder requirements water crop blue and green of livestock, case the In said to remain within embodied that product. be can requirements water crop upstream the products, agricultural in trade countries When of maize. mass per volume water blue and green of coefficients giving thereby hectare, same by that produced grain of maize quantity to the related be can conditions of growing set and location given in a field maize hectare by aone used consumptively water blue and terms tobesynonyms.terms land’ or’place-orientedecologicalfootprints’are used; weconsiderthese We usetheterm ‘embodied land’here. Sometimes, suchas’virtual terms trade.will beincludedinassessmentsoflandembodied ininternational grown ontheselandscontinuetobeincludedin official tradestatistics, they land rightsonforeignterritories(“landgrabbing’). As long astradedproducts tosecurelong-term widespread discussionaboutnations/companiestrying conflictandwars.which isoftenlinkedtoarmed Recently, therehasbeen atthecostofothernations,A nationcanonlyextenditsterritory asituation , 2012) to 1,654 25 This implies implies This 26

et al. et (Fischer of inputs level a mixed with cultivation cereal for suitable very or suitable area and area, forest area, cropland cropland), and meadows pastures, (permanent area land Figure 33 for the following categories: agricultural in as of graph type same the disaggregating picture, differentiated a more shows therefore, production of land-based products. Figure 34, the for potential the however, investigating when use, of limited are 33 Figure in numbers The availability. land capita per in second former Soviet Union and other Europe ranks a high of the region the while capita, per 1ha than less region exhibits quite low levels of land availability, EU15+ The Asia. Western and Africa, Northern and Africa Sub-Saharan in high also is availability Land exception. an constituting Caribbean the and America Central with of land, availability high very exhibit Oceania) (and Americas the general, In availability. land capita per lowest the with eastern Asia and southern Asia, are the ones populations), (i.e. largest bars widest the with regions the that demonstrates This person. per area land of available values absolute the shows also x-axis), (on graph the the region each in of people number the for accounting ha/cap). By 0.5 than less with Asia (southern lowest the with to those 8ha/cap) almost at Oceania, and America from those with the highest availability (North ranked according to per capita land availability, are 11 Regions across regions. world resources of land distribution the 32 shows Figure world. the around differ availability and productivity Land land in biomass production (see details below). of use to dominant the owing products, forestry and of agricultural trade in embodied resources land on focused commonly are studies the than studies on other resources. other on studies than fewer are focus primary their trade international 27 yields (asopposedtoapproachesthatrelysolely on globalaveragevalues). levelsoflandproductivities,demand onthebasisofcountry-specific i.e. toassessconsumptionlinkedland hypothetical energyland)andthattry include ecologicalfootprintstudiesthatfocuson actual land(asopposedto andlifestyles.differences inconsumptionpatterns Inthisoverview, weonly values forlandproductivities, representingthereforemainlyareflectionof the standardcalculationforecologicalfootprintsusesglobalaverage needed toabsorbemissionsfromfossilfuelsthroughbiomass). Additionally, and hypotheticallandareas(so-calledenergyland, thelandthatwouldbe considered asameasureofreallanddemand, asitincludesbothactual hectares, asthecommondenominator; however, thisindicatorcannotbe trade betweennationsthecentreofattention, usesameasureoflandarea, The vastliteratureonecologicalfootprintaccounts, whichalsooftenmakes International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 27 Among them, them, Among , 2001). , 63 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

64 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 33 Figure 32 et al. et (Erb land of pasture interpretation and definition different to very due limited is productive land. However, its explanatory value of measure interesting an be potentially would top 35 left) (Figure area Agricultural Distribution oflandresourcesacrossworldregionsfortheyear2000 2000 Distribution oflandresourcesandpotentialacrossworldregionsfortheyear , 2007). most likely underreported in these statistics (e.g. statistics these in underreported likely most the productive grasslands of South-East Asia are production al. (Erb et livestock for use no virtually with lands desert contain data these Asia Eastern in instance, For , 2007). On the other hand hand , 2007). other the On available land. the totalamountof each barrepresents lows thatthearea of spective region. Itfol- of peopleinthere- the widthnumber available percapita, the amountofland the barsrepresents Legend: The heightof ern Asia. pale green: South- Asia, yellow: Eastern South-east Asia,pale blue: EU15+,purple: Caribbean, middle tral Americaandthe Africa, orange:Cen- green: Sub-Saharan Western Asia,dark Africaand Northern America, lightblue: dark yellow:South and otherEurope, Former SovietUnion and Oceania,grey: brown: NorthAmerica y-axes; colourcodes: ferent scalesonthe Legend: note thedif- is quite similar to the one based on the GAEZ GAEZ the on based to one the similar quite is picture The regions. world the across (NPP) production primary net of potential distribution the shows it resources: land from production of biomass potential the for metric alternative an offers 34 of Figure part lower The cultivation. cereal for suitable as identified areas land than greater were areas cropland the regions, Asian populated densely the in contrast, In Africa. Sub-Saharan and America South forests: tropical of remaining areas largest the with ones the were 2000 in area cropland actual for values the and cultivation cereal for potential with of land values the between difference largest the with regions to the note that interesting is It Africa. Saharan Sub- and Oceania America, by North followed availability, capita per in top again on out comes al. inputs (Fischer et mixed with cultivation cereal for suitable very or suitable being as identified of lands distribution the shows 33 of Figure chart right lower The available. is capita per land of forest 0.06 ha about only where Asia, southern in acute particularly is situation The respectively. regions, forest temperate and cover forest tropical as known being despite levels, capita per forest lower having as regions these show Asia southern and Asia South-East in deforestation of accelerated rates recent The areas. forest Eastern Europe, regions which have huge boreal and Union Soviet former the America, by North followed is It capita. per area forest highest the with region the as forests, tropical surviving large its with America, South shows left) (lower 33 Figure terms. capita per in Asia eastern in than higher times eight over is Oceania and America North in of cropland use The capita. per area land of values lowest the report Asia east and south whereas capita, per area land considerable offer can Europe and Union Soviet former the Oceania, America, North security. and supply food in of croplands role to central the owing account, (Figure 33 top right) represents a more reliable The picture for the global distribution of croplands by FAO,reported 2012 year). same the for area to 1.5 the of pasture compared million Philippines, the for 2000 in hectares 6.5 million of more area agrassland reports Kastner, 2009 , 2001). South America , 2001). America South in South America and Sub-Saharan Africa. Africa. Sub-Saharan and America South in cropland, not currently are which but cultivation for apotential with areas large identify estimates future potential for cropland expansion, these the towards Looking inhabitant. per potential lower population have density) high cropland of (areas hand, other the on Oceania, and America, Sub-Saharan Africa, North America South considerably. estimates these exceed even areas cropland current Asia, southern and of eastern case the in and, cultivation, for suitable deemed land all nearly use areas populated Densely patterns. cropland current than skewed more even is potential cultivation with land of distribution the that and globe the across unequally distributed are resources cropland of population), distribution uneven the from starting thus (and values capita of per terms in that, reveals figure The 2000. year the in regions al. et to Fischer (according cultivation cereal for Figure 34 compares land potentially suitable feedstuff). in trade however, does, it include products; animal of to trade the linked cropland for account not does and re-exports excludes (note this that 2005 in trade to international linked was area cropland al. et Kastner flows, trade to international linked for agricultural production. With respect to lands suitable of land endowments differentiated the for Krausmann al. et Haberl 2009; (e.g. al. et Erb availability land low with to those from regions with high per capita land availability flows find trade, of biomass accounts general, below). In (see rare are issues distribution such on trade of this impact of the accounts Global to lowered. are be endowment land capita per in differences these if role, adecisive play can products biomass in trade that implies analysis the report, of this to relevance the respect With regions. world across unevenly distributed and the potential for biomass production are resources land values, capita of per terms in that, apparent is 33,it Figure 32 and From Figure linked. closely often are NPP and potential cultivation that to fact the owing likely most data, , 2001) to actual cropland areas for ten world world ten for areas , 2001) cropland to actual (2012) of global 16 cent about per that state et al. et International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2009). These flows compensate compensate flows These , 2009). , 2012; al. et Kastner , 2011; F. , 65 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

66 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 34 the EU’s present cropland area. cropland EU’sthe present than larger considerably is consumption to this studies establish that the cropland linked demand these Union; European the for exist studies land,embodied forest especially area. Similar of importer anet was US the that conclude al. et al. et (Costello published been have consumption in models which estimate land embodied demand IO on based of studies anumber Recently, embodied land Studies onvirtualor width thenumberofpeopleinaregion. Thearea ofeachbarrepresents theabsoluteamounts. based ondatafrom (FAO, 2012))for10worldregions. Theheightofthebarsrepresents percapita values,the suitable andforcereal cultivationwithmixedlevelsofinputs)versuscropland area in2000(rightside, Legend: land suitableforcereal cultivation(leftside,basedondatafrom (Fischeretal.,2001),categoriesvery significant involve would therefore, areas, these in of cropland expansion The storage. carbon and forested, sustaining high values of biodiversity currently are lands of these However, areas large 28 Bringezu trade of agricultural products for the period period the for products of agricultural trade trends in cropland in embodied the international al. et Kastner snapshot, aone-year only give studies of these most While 36. Figure in presented is this et al.(2011)alsoshowedthatEuropelargelydepends on overseaslands. all soybeans)intheseflowsofembodiedland. UsinganIOapproach, Lugschitz (35 Mhain2007/2008); theirresultsrevealthedominanceofoilseeds(above and Noleppa(2010)estimateconsiderablylargernet importsofembodiedland imports intotheEUwerearound15Mhaforperiod studied. Von Witzke consumption exceeded0.3ha/cap. Van derSleen(2009)showsthatnet about 0.25ha/cap. From 2000to2007thecroplandslinkeddomestic regions Land suitableforcerealcultivationversuscroplandareain200010 world , 2013; Yu al. et , 2011; al. et Steen-Olsen (2014) recently produced a time series on on series (2014) atime produced recently et al.(2012)arguethattheEU’s domesticcroplandareawas , 2013). al. et Costello , 2012; Weinzettel 28 An example of example An (2011) (2011) Cropland area should be restricted to this level. to this restricted be should area Cropland defined. was of 0.20 ha/person a threshold al. et (Bringezu report land UNEP the In burdens. of environmental terms in drawbacks (Kastner clear, policy-relevant conclusions can be drawn biophysical approaches is needed, before of results and results IO-based between differences reconcile or to explain investigations argues that, for land, embodied in-depth further commentary Arecent studies. IO monetary many for true holds also limitation same the study); in this sector single a constitute fishing sector aggregation (agriculture, forestry and of level high by the limited is land-use actual to trade of linking use practical The tables. IO footprintecological analysis based on physical (2003), however, an Giljum and present Hubacek such approaches use IO monetary tables. Mostly, data. yield and trade biophysical on solely based to work alternative an as suggested been has models, of MRIO adoption the through often analysis, of input-output use The 100 Mha. below just or per cent 50 cropland for production export increased by over period, this in level global the at stable almost used in direct domestic consumption remained cropland that, while 1986 found They to 2009. et al. et , 2014). , , 2014), addition to land, this section will also cover cover also will section this to land, addition In practices. land-use through ecosystems in available biomass the alter humans how indicators of land-use intensity, which measure of set acomprehensive represents components sub- various its and Production) Primary Net products. HANPP (Human Appropriation of hectares linked to the consumption of biomass into total results aggregating when consider to important is This undertaken. are measures colonization costly massive, unless all, at output productivity can hardly produce any biomass natural low with area same the family, while alarge for food produce can cropland fertile qualities. As explained earlier, one hectare of differing highly with aresource represents Land Embodied HANPP transition. aforest through passed have that nations many in effects displacement al. et (Meyfroidt nations 12 for analyses similar, comparative conducting by expanded Later, was work nations. this other to of land-use displacement by the driven partly was Nam’s transition Viet that forest show and country) or a region within to reforestation net deforestation net from (i.e. change the transitions of forest context the in trade to international linked land-use put (2009) Lambin and Meyfroidt Source: (Lugschitz Trade balanceoftheEUintermsembodiedland et al.,2011) , 2010). discovered They embodied HANPP.embodied of amounts considerable importing were Asia western and Africa northern in countries and Korea, and Japan as well as countries, European suppliers of land-based products, while many main the were Oceania and Americas the that shows map The resources. land foreign on dependency therefore and HANPP embodied of imports net HANPP, imply colours red of embodied exports net indicate tones blue nation’s consumption of biomass products. While to a linked HANPP embodied the and territory anation’s on occurring HANPP between ratio the levels, national at 36: shows, it Figure in al. et (Erb study former the from result 140 main The across nations. analysis al. et Haberl by confirmed is This status. development of irrespective importers, net main the ones populated densely and exporters net main the be to regions populated sparsely find They nations. between to trade net linked HANPP al. et Erb approach. the for framing aconceptual provide al. et to Haberl trade. linked impacts use land- investigating in HANPP of embodied use the explore that of studies anumber are There HANPP). of embodied accounts (i.e. to trade linked of HANPP assessments (2012), astatistical for data the use who (2009) present a global account of account aglobal present (2009) International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2009) is presented presented is , 2009) (2009) (2009)

Figure 35 67 4.1 Biomass trade and upstream requirements, including land-use International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

68 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 36 required as a balancing for mechanism supply is products biomass in trade –and production endowments of land suitable for agricultural to different due extent –to alarge globe the around unevenly distributed is extraction Biomass and upstreamrequirements Conclusions onbiomass trade report. this in comprehensively subject the on literature vast the cover not do we framework, footprint ecological the within establish to difficult are provision their for used areas land physical the and flows resource between links clear As lifestyles. and patterns consumption in differences of areflection mainly is footprint Rather, ecological the areas. land hypothetical and existing of mixing the and processes, weighting the of because primarily activities, trade or by consumption induced use land actual assesses that indicator an not is footprint ecological hectares’, an ‘global in expressed while that, clear becomes it overview, methodological short From this use. fuel fossil of absence the in occur cannot overshoot an such framework; indicator present the in as areas, CO2 the of inclusion the by caused is overshoot level,this global the At level, or,overshoot. global the at deficit ecological an termed is ‘biocapacity’ available the than larger footprint ecological An sustainability. (un) of messages communicable easily provides indicator the hectares’), ‘global into translated also (or ‘biocapacity’, resources land available to the capita) per or national global, (either value overall calculated the comparing By exist. actually not do and hypothetical are hectares’, they ‘global in expressed also are lands these While emissions. these to sequester required be would that area land the into by aperson or aterritory on combustion fuel fossil from emissions CO2 to translate seeks measure This areas. CO2 includes also footprint ecological the products, biomass for land Besides grassland). vs. (e.g.cropland quality land in average differences reflecting weightings, different receive use land of types different Additionally, productivity. average global of land on product agiven produce to needed be would that area the reflects therefore hectare’ A ‘global productivities. land for values calculated by translating the (apparent) consumption into ‘global hectares’, applying global average through theexpressed denominator common ‘global hectares’. footprint The isecological typically land, productive biologically for demand into levels consumption human translating at indicator, aimed al. et (Kitzes footprint ecological The Ecological footprint Infobox 3 Source: (Erb nation’s consumption Ratio betweenHANPPonanation’sterritoryandembodiedlinkedto et al.,2009) , 2008; Wackernagel and Rees, 1996) presents an aggregate aggregate an 1996) presents Rees, and Wackernagel , 2008; per capita terms. Therefore, biomass trade flows flows trade biomass Therefore, terms. capita per in of biomass amounts high harvest and land have large availability of potential agricultural hand, other the on density, population of low land suitable for agricultural production. Areas capita of per amounts by small and harvests biomass capita per by low characterized are areas density population High demand. and every year, 42 per cent is used in buildings and and buildings in year, used is cent 42every per produced of tons steel 1billion than more the (2012), Cullen and to Allwood of out According buildings. and infrastructure as such applications mass in widely used are metals these of lead, 2010). (Graedel, exception the energy) With and of power, transportation the for (essential copper and batteries), in use (for lead transportation), in required (primarily steels), aluminium structural for mainly (used manganese and of iron up made are economies human in flows mass nature, in existing metals different sixty than more the of Out commodities. high-tech and materials specific producing for scale industrial an on used and extracted is table periodic the in element Today, iron. and tin however, every almost copper, as such of metals, number alimited only processed humans century, nineteenth the Until purposes. military and construction agriculture, for instruments and tools has enabled humans to construct more efficient metals use and to forge ability The development. economic in role acentral play Metals 4.2 increases further for space much leave not does and maximum at a is Intensification land. available their for productivity to maximum close are countries European and Asian level, global At the 2001). (Regmi, trend of this example an as serve can mix trade the in products of animal share growing the products, agricultural For stages. processing lower at material requirements, compared to goods upstream higher have, by definition, products biomass products in trade. Higher-processed from the growing share of higher-processed results mainly requirements upstream in growth faster The biomass. traded directly than faster requirements of biomass materials have grown upstream but categories, material to other rates comparable at grown has trade Biomass (Asiadensity and Europe). Sub-Saharan Africa) to areas of high population of parts FSU and the Oceania, America, South and (North countries populated sparsely from Metals trade and upstream requirements capita stocks accumulation. Industrialized Industrialized accumulation. stocks capita per the and metals of use countries’ reflects centuries. The history of economic development not if years, for societies in accumulated are to which stocks, eventually and to processing extraction from aflow mainly are metals Thus, edge technology. to cutting- and society to modern important are that of those list the from eliminated be currently can element chemical any hardly that concludes (UNEP, Graedel 2010) industry. electronics the in small or even microscopic amounts, especially in used increasingly are platinum, and indium as 2012). Cullen, and such metals, (Allwood Other packaging in used is 13 and cent per equipment industrial in required is cent 20 per buildings, in 24 planes), cent and per trucks (cars, equipment transportation in used is cent 26 per around of aluminium products produced year, every tons million 45 of the Out ships. and trucks cars, 12 in cent per afurther and equipment mechanical and electrical in used being cent per 16 afurther with 14 infrastructure, in cent per expected. be can area of forest loss and problems. However, increasing land degradation environmental the for compensate degree, can, some to efficiencies in increases potential, (UNCTAD, 2012).effects of future terms In technologiesin have harvest aggravated these inefficiencies Erb, Moreover, 2009). and high Zika 2011; Meyfroidt, and Lambin UNCTAD, 2012; al. et (Foley, Krausmann 2005; changes ecosystem and degradation land of forests, down cutting the in resulted has regions these However, expanded biomass production in productive land available for biomass harvest. and additional have regions these capacities, of future terms In area. land available of the productivity high of the also but of land availability of the only not use make thus and extraction, biomass capita per high on focussed are Africa Sub-Saharan in areas some and America, North America, Latin density. population of low regions i.e. regions, other from imports on depending are in productivity. populated densely These areas International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2013; 69 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

70 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 37 environmental impacts of metal use by humans. by humans. use of metal impacts environmental the on knowledge of existing synthesis al. Voet et der (van Cycles” and Flows Metals Anthropogenic of Challenges and Risks “Environmental on Report Panel Resource International UNEP published recently The problems. of environmental to amultitude contribute of metals processing and extraction The al. et (Graedel challenge aglobal still is rates recycling boosting Clearly, cent. 1per rate below arecycling register of these thirty-four and cent, per 50 rate above recycling end-of-life an have metals of existing one-third However, than less times. several used and recycled be can metals Although not a renewable resource like biomass, Source: (Mudd, 2010) respective the depleting and reducing extraction each material, anon-renewable are Metals countries. of developed favour in again higher, times twelve and five between is stock steel stainless while countries, developed less in than countries developed in higher times ten to four around is example, for capita, per stock 2010). (Graedel, Copper countries developed less to compared metals, of various stocks capita per larger accumulated naturally have countries The decliningoregradesofmetals , 2013) provides a comprehensive , 2013) acomprehensive provides , 2011). 2011). , } } } } problems include: of environmental Examples processing. and of extraction technologies the and deposit, the of characteristics specific the metal, respective the on things, other among depend, use by metals caused problems environmental The ore. gross ton of per content metal in and tons per price of terms in -both diverse highly are products metal and ores Metal chemicals. and water of energy, requirements input higher with and ecosystems global and local on impacts potential with out, to broken be has ore gross more that means deposits depleting and extraction metals 38). Continuing (Figure resources of accessible of depletion degree current the reflect partly grades ore Worsening deposit. } } } } populations local on impacts their and properly) used not (if of toxic substances release or Disposal operations Damage resulting from and grinding crushing mining operations such as blasting and haulage of open-pit aresult as pollution, noise and Dust to mines the roads access and of mines installation the for settlements human and of ecosystems Removal } The uneven geographical distribution of deposits of deposits distribution geographical uneven The 2012). (BGR, reserves global of cent per 58 around contained and extraction tin of global 78.4 for cent per responsible were countries producing 2010, tin- leading three the In of countries. ahandful among concentrated tin, are copper, as cobaltand such metals, some of grades to date. Commercial deposits few very found have countries other while deposits, various with endowed well are Australia and China as such countries some of deposits, knowledge of current basis the on and reasons different For of sources. depletion through as well as exploration and technology in to improvements according of accessibility, terms in time, over changing is but of view point geological a from fixed is deposits of metal distribution geographical the Thus, expectations. available technologies, by-products and price accessibility, concentration, as such factors, several on depends turn, in viability, Economic viable. economically is extraction if only to deposits be considered are sources these globe, the on everywhere earth’s crust the in exist of metals variety alarge though Even resources. to biomass contrast in concentrated, geographically are of metals Deposits Global metalextractionandtrade,1980–2010 }

billion tonnes processing locations. or mines the near reserves water and of soil overexploitation and contamination General 4 0 1 2 3 5 6 7 1980 global metalimports global metalextraction 1985 1990 1995 2000 et al. et (Wiedmann of imports cent to 62 per rises share this equivalents, material raw in measured When DMI. in share imports a24 cent with high, per fairly is metals all for dependencies import global average 2008), in cent 8per around was DMI in imports of biomass share average global (the low are biomass, where average dependencies import to Compared of metals. imports on depend have to sources domestic sufficient without Countries metals. in trade international drive applications) and industries some in impossible and their limited substitutability (considered such as cars or machinery. machinery. or cars as such goods metal-based as well as tailings, and rods tubes, wires, as such of metals, out mainly made semi-products, and alloys includes also metals Trade in concentrates. and ores processed metallic commodities, which are predominantly traded physically only includes hand, other the on trade, rocks). Metal and minerals non-metallic of proportion alarge contains also (which ore gross includes extraction metals methodology, toto MFA 2.1 According 2008. in tons billion by 216 cent, increased per metals in trade 2011,(SERI, period, same the 39). During Figure 2008 in tons to tons 6.6 billion 3.5 billion around from decades, three past the in cent 87 per by increased has of metals extraction Global Direct tradeofmetalgoods 2005 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2013)., 2008 ports. trade asglobalim- (Dittrich, 2012);note: (SERI, 2011);trade: Sources: Extraction:

Figure 38 71 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

72 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 39 metal products were traded. Iron ores and and ores Iron traded. were products metal manufactured and of tons (semi-)processed billion 0.8 and concentrates, and materials of raw form 2010,In the in 1.4 of tons metals, around billion imports. terms:UnitedNationsComtrade;physical(Dittrich,2012). Note:trademeasuredSource: Monetary in same the during concentrates and ores metal of traded value the exceeded metals processed of value monetary 40). The (Figure metals (semi-) processed of traded amount the exceeded concentrates and ores metal of traded weight the observed, years the all However, nearly in material. same of the counting multiple to leading decades, three past the during cent per by 302 increased has of metals out made products final and Trade semi-manufactured in trade. in rise rapid this driving are goods metal differentiated international production chains of more and Enlarged millennium. of the turn the (+224 since rates extraction cent), especially per than faster increasing been has Trade metals in -0,1 0,1 0,3 0,5 0,7 0,9 1,1 1,3 1,5 2010 Trade inmetalsbydegreeofprocessingmonetaryandphysicalterms,1980– 1980 billion tonnes

(semi-) processed metals (monetary terms) metal oresandconcentrates(monetaryterms) (semi-) processedmetals(physicalterms) metal oresandconcentrates(physicalterms) 1990 and copper. and nickel (Figure 41). by aluminium, followed was Iron concentrates and ores metal raw traded in cent per 83 of around ashare held concentrates in trade. increase to continued the factor a contributing emerging economies, China, in particular was in materials raw for demand ongoing The value. in slightly only dropped and of weight terms in increased trade concentrates and global economic slump; however, metal ores the reflecting terms, physical and monetary in decreased metals processed in trade 2009, In rises. of weight unit per value the while into concentrates, ore gross converting of process first the during particularly weight lose Metals Introduction. the in explained as cycle, life their during relationship to value weight same the follow products Metallic period. 2000 1,000 billionUS$ 2010 0,0 1,0 2,0 3,0 4,0 5,0 6,0 7,0 Source: (Dittrichetal.,2012) Trade ofmetalgoodsbycontinent,2008 America by Latin followed 2008, in tons million 338 with of metals, supplier net largest the was Oceania) (including (Figure 42). Australia countries American Latin and by European followed exports), plus (imports metals in trade Asian countries recorded the highest volume of Source: (Dittrich,2012). Composition oftradedmetalgoodsbydegreeprocessing,2010 1000 1200 1400 -800 -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 800 0,4 1,4 0,0 0,2 0,6 0,8 1,0 1,2 1,6 0 million tonnes billion tonnes

Africa concentrates ores and Asia and nalcommodities Europe $semi-processed

respectively. respectively. 162 tons, with 27 and million America, North and by Europe tons, followed million 548 with importer, net dominant the was Asia respectively. tons, million 39 322 and with Africa, and America Latin America International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment North uranium, thorium tin precious metals lead zinc copper nickel non-ferrous metals other aluminum iron made ofmetals products mainly

Oceania

Export Import

Figure 41 Figure 40 73 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

74 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 42 Australia, Brazil, Chile, Indonesia, Russia, India include rates extraction high with countries rich 2011).(SERI, mineral- and of metal- Examples of metals rates extraction high and considered) importer of metals. Natural endowment is not not is endowment Natural of metals. importer net world’s the is largest but 2006), Bank, World 2011; (SERI, capita per extraction 42nd metals in and capita per wealth mineral in 43rd ranks China 2012). (Dittrich, importer ametals as 2nd place in 2011), (SERI, extraction metals capita per is but 105th and in 2006) Bank, (World wealth metals 2012). 62nd in (Dittrich, ranks Japan importer net 2011), (SERI, extraction a as 4th in is place it but 31st and 2006) metals in Bank, (World capita per wealth 32nd metals in ranks US the example, For importers. metal major are capita per extractions and reserves medium with economies emerging and countries Industrialized countries. importing of metal- example typical but extreme an is China Source: Dittrich,2012 29 10 which (2006), metals in estimate Bank to aWorld (according reserves large with countries are of metals suppliers global large All countries. different the in industries of demands specific and rates extraction deposits, respective the extent to some tracks trade of metals distribution geographical The Bauxite, copper, gold, ironore, lead, nickel, phosphate, tin, silverandzinc in theyear2010 Main netsuppliers(10countries)andmainimportersofmetals million tonnes -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 800 0

Australia

Brazil

South Africa India

Indonesia

29 and minerals were were minerals and

Ukraine Russian

Fed.

Sweden

Philippines

Kazakhstan

throughout the observed. period countries, importing 3.4–3.8 around against as country exporting one constant: remained has countries importing and exporting the between Soviet Union). Nevertheless, the relationship former the from (e.g.into existence countries come have countries new several because decades recent in increased has countries importing and exporting of both number The extraction. metal domestic than rather imports upon to rely of countries decision to the contribute also of extraction costs and pressure public standards, Environmental trade. and extraction metals determining factor only the currently the largest importer of metals. of metals. importer largest the currently is China this, 1.2 tons. Despite around at billion 2008, in extraction metal absolute highest the to (2011), SERI according with country the was and, minerals and metals in country richest fourth the is (2006), it Bank to World the according of this: example prominent most the is China market. to world the supplying are extractions and reserves high with countries all not But metals. of suppliers global main ten the among are countries of these all Chile, for Except Africa. South and

Spain

Turkey Saudi Arabia

Malaysia

United States Italy

Germany

Korea, Rep.

Japan

China recycled machines. in and equipment transportation in trade include 2010. in 1980in cent to 6.8 per Examples cent 4.3 per from increased trade metals in scrap and of waste proportion The metals. in trade international of the apart already is stocks of human recycling and reuse The of metals. stocks accumulating rapidly also are Singapore, and Korea South China, mines’). Some emerging economies, such as ’urban (so-called ground above stocks in-use societal in accumulated temporarily are that resources of secondary recycling the describes mining’. to ‘urban term as The referred generally metals, for source future important an providing infrastructure and manufactured goods, is of form the in countries, industrialized in stocks metal of accumulated volume high The Sources: (Dittrich,2012;World Bank,2012);grouping according to(Krausmannetal.,2008) Metal tradeaccordingtopopulationdensityanddevelopmentstatus exports. metal capita of per values higher significantly exhibit America Latin and Australia as such countries world’ ‘New exporters. largely populated industrial and developing countries are predominantly importers, while sparsely are countries developing and industrial populated densely resources, other with As -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 0 million tonnes populated & densely countries industrial Metals developing PTB percapita(metals) populated countries % densely countries -old populated 3 sparsely industrial world countries -old developing populated ecological limits.ecological locally within reasonable economic, social and provided be cannot that requirements material to increasing linked trends development recent of population settlement, exploitation and history the reflects metals in trade Physical impacts of the extraction and processing of processing and extraction of the impacts environmental of the Acomparison processes. environmental impacts during the production least-induced the with locations in processed and to extracted be metals allows trade Theoretically, of deposits. endowment alow but demand ahigh with countries in impacts environmental severe as well as costs, and efforts technological immense mean would This stocks. human from or nature –from locally metals required the to have extract would country each trade, without economy ahypothetical In of metals. countries consumer and countries of supplier distribution the optimizing by efficiency resource higher for effort global the supports Trade metals in traded metals Upstream requirementsof 3 sparsely world countries -new populated 1 sparsely industrial International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment world tonnes percapita countries -new developing populated / sparsely world -1,2 -0,7 -0,2 0,3 0,8

Figure 43 75 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

76 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 44 ROW: rest oftheworld Source: Ownfigure basedon(Bruckneretal.,2012);HD:highpopulationdensity, LD:lowpopulationdensity, 30 GRAM-model of the results first The recently. published been have metals of traded equivalents material raw on data level Global international trade. by redistributed indirectly or directly extraction of metals share the on information yields products metallic of traded equivalents material raw the and extraction However, trade. in comparing products further-processed or concentrates and extraction) for measure (the ore gross between volume in difference variable) (and huge of the because much, reveal not does of metals trade and of extraction A comparison of tradedmetals(RMEaccounts) requirements Upstream material section. following the in presented be will results The trade. of metals impacts environmental the to discuss proxies as water, and used are energy, materials particular in processing, and extraction for resources upstream required Currently, task. asimple not certainly is and knowledge, to our undertaken, yetbeen not has countries different in metals traded metalsandupstreamflows. The GRAM-modelsumsupmetalsandindustrialmineralsaswelldirectly billion tonnes RTB ofmetalsandindustrialmineralsbycountrygroup,19952005 -0,5 0,5 1,5 -1 0 1

OECD HD

30 OECD LD show that, show by 60 per cent. per by 60 of metals exports net decreased countries OECD commodities. In contrast, populated sparsely for demand to local match resources renewable of non- exports increased countries The cent. by 780 per (RTB), increased balance trade material raw as measured exports, net where countries, world) of the (rest of non-OECD group populated densely the in occurred key changes 2012). al, et 1995, with 45; Bruckner Compared (Figure 2005 in minerals industrial and metals indirectly) and (directly net-exported countries, non-OECD from countries density population low and high as well as countries, OECD populated sparsely whereas demand, final domestic for countries foreign in extracted minerals industrial and 1.2 of tons metals indirectly, or billion directly net-imported, countries OECD populated al. et Bruckner consumption is increasingly met through imports. metals global Thus, 2008. in to trade linked was extraction of metals cent 62 per that calculated al. et (Bruckner to rose 37.6 figure this 2005, in indirectly, cent per or directly traded was extraction mineral industrial and metals 1995, in of global while, cent 26.9 per

ROW HD (2012) densely that found , 2012). al. et Wiedmann

ROW LD (2013) 2005 1995 at regional levels, for the European Union, Union, European the for levels, regional at of studies that analyse material requirements anumber are there perspective, a material 2014; Enterprise, DG al. et Moss broader sense (e.g. European Commission, a in metals on studies several are There populated.densely are requirements material upstream highest the with commodities metal import that countries ten (waste) materials are populated, sparsely while upstream highest the with study, countries ten the to the According flows. trade (i.e. upstream) indirect of all 10 for cent but per trade of direct cent 0.5 per only for accounted copper,is which relation an extreme of An example flows. indirect associated in share highest the for accounts al. et 1962. to Dittrich since According goods traded of all requirements material upstream global of the cent per 50 around for accounted have al. et Dittrich installed. is amine before vegetation and ground of the top layer of the removal the al. et Dittrich example, (for of trade assessments LCA-based Many transport. and processing extraction, during used fuels fossil the include metals of traded requirements material upstream LCA the in approach, example, For products. traded the to produce required materials upstream the on focuses approach cycle life the demand, to final extraction allocates which approach, to above-mentioned the contrast In of tradedmetals(LCAaccounts) requirements Upstream material 2003. in imports materials of upstream 25 tons around required suppliers, copper major world’s of the one ton of Chile’saverage exports, An balances. trade equivalent material raw and balances trade physical direct between difference calculations reveal that Chile displayed the largest The kind. its of first the is effort Mexico). This Ecuador, and Colombia, Chile, (Brazil, countries American Latin five in equivalents material raw to calculate tables input-output extended Muñoz al. et , 2012) also include unused extraction, e.g. extraction, , 2012) unused include also (2012), steel) and (as ore, concentrates iron (2009) used environmentally environmentally used (2009) (2012) estimated that traded metals (2012) metals traded that estimated , 2013). From countries, in particular from South America (iron (iron America South from particular in countries, 59 from requirements (net) upstream high with moreimporting raw and semi-processed metals (net) is Germany hand, other the On products. metal exporting was it to which countries with balance trade metal indirect and direct negative to a have tended Germany 2005, that, in (2010) Dittrich calculated and Beys Kathy Stiftung as further-processed or final goods. Aachener metals, although these countries metals export by traded dominated also are exports countries’ European of many requirements material The as copper. such requirements, material upstream high particularly with metals more importing towards atrend also but decades, the over grades ore worsening generally trends: several reflects increase The ton of metal. imported per 8 tons to linked been only had ton of metal imported 1980, in each decades: past over increased has to 4.3 ratio linked (2008). tons was The import ton of each goods, traded of all average the in 2008; in requirements material of upstream 11 to around linked was metal tons imported ton of average An requirements. of upstream amounts highest the for responsible is trade metals that reveals flows trade Germany’s in materials of upstream 2013; analysis 2008) UBA, al. et Agency’s (Dittrich Environmental German the example, For countries. selected in of trade part as trade metals investigate studies Some et al., 2012). (e.g.studies Schoer subsequent by confirmed been have decades past during requirements in increase the and abroad from requirements Union’s material European the in trade of metals ores from developing countries. The dominance to imported attributed be could requirements Union’s material European of the two-thirds nearly 2000, In goods. semi-manufactured and materials raw as of metals imports increased through and industries processing in particular 1976 in between 2000, Union and European of the requirements material the in increase of an trend general the observed authors The al. et by Schütz out carried was study such first The decades. past during metals of importers main of the one as example, for International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment (2004). (2004). , 77 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

78 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 45 upstream requirements offer a crystallized view view acrystallized offer requirements upstream to approaches LCA-based earlier, explained As weapons and appliances. machines, of cars, imports require nonetheless but industries processing have not do which or far, so discovered been have sources metals no where Kenya, and Arabia Saudi as such countries and industries, processing and mines domestic abroad. include islands without Examples requirements material to high linked are imports their that implying trade, metal indirect and direct of balances trade positive have goods, final of form the in them, importing only but metals processing nor extracting neither are which Countries machines. or cars as such goods, domestically or exported as final high-quality consumed either are metals the afterwards, added; are carriers, energy including inputs, material other and refined further are metals Germany, like countries, processing In emissions. and wastes as remain materials of upstream amounts highest the Chile, or Brazil as such countries, extracting in materials: of upstream terms in burden environmental the ’redistributes’ trade of how example agood is Germany Source: (AachenerStiftungKathyBeysandDittrich,2010) and ores (iron ores), Canada (iron Africa South and copper), Scandinavian countries (alumina), metal tradebycountry,2005 Germany’s directtradeinmetalsandthematerialrequirementsof GER TBMR TBMR TBMR Balanced +/-5.000t TBMR TBMR TBMR met met met met met met <5Miot, >5Miot, -100.000 –-1Miot -5.000 –-100.000t 5.000 –500.000t 500.000 –5Miot discharge causedby burden causedbyGER processing steps. steps. processing and metals certain for averages global or country on based still are studies However, available most technologies and additional different inputs. different for times, all at countries and locations all across mines different for provides it coefficients of specific number huge the is approach LCA by the presented challenge main The sources. energy and technology in differences comprise also may coefficients LCA mine. of the operation and construction the during ecosystems on and of soil top layer the on encroachment human reflects also extraction metal. Furthermore, the inclusion of unused traded the for requirement material the higher the metal, of the processing the advanced more the and grades ore the lower The metals. of traded of concentration degree the and grades of ore appliances) and Australia (iron ores). (iron Australia and appliances) electronic and alloys (tin, iron China titanium), need it in substantial amounts, and this can result result can this and amounts, substantial in it need operations mining as countries, mining many in resource sensitive increasingly Water an is traded metals requirementsof Upstream water PTB PTB No dataavailable PTB PTB PTB PTB met met met met met met <-500.000t,net-exportstocountry -5.000–-50.000t -50.000–-500.000t 5.000–50.000t 50.000–500.000t >500.000t,net-importsfromcountry trade balance requirements PTB…physical TBMR… trade balance metal water requirements per unit concentrate. concentrate. unit per requirements water upstream higher in result metals of base grades ore declining requirements, water influence configuration mill and mineralogy ore type, mine as such factors, several Although by platinum. closely of 716,000 followed kg gold, per litres average an with requirements, water highest the has clearly Gold of metals. types within and between both significantly, vary commodities of metal requirements water the that observed He GRI. in industries by mining provided reports of the basis the on requirements water analysed (2008) Mudd detail. varying in albeit requirements, 31 and of metals transporting) (particularly trading during the mining, refining,and processing requirements to relate energy substances sources or weathering). Emissions of further magnitude as natural sources (e.g. volcanic of order same of the to roughly be estimated the environment (excluding landfill) havebeen into of metals (2013) emissions that reports IRP UNEP goods. metallic and of metals the mining, refining,and processing trading to linked substances of further emissions and air, into the water or of metals soil emissions imply context this in Emissions of emissions. amounts to high linked are goods metallic and metals traded that to emphasize important is it goods, of traded impacts environmental the on focus not does report this Although Emissions linkedtometals (GRI), Initiative Reporting Global of the framework the within their sustainability performance; for example, Many annually on mining report companies trade. of metals requirements water into upstream insights some offer may compilation this export, for are metals extracted many 2008). As (Mudd, exists requirements water and general in mining between links the of acompilation unavailable, currently is metals of traded requirements water upstream analysing study acomprehensive though Even resources. groundwater and surface on impacts major in globalreporting.org For aboutthe GlobalReportingInitiative, furtherinformation see: www. 31 most address companies water upstream requirements Conclusions onmetalstradeand al. Voet et der (van Cycles and Flows Risks and of Challenges Anthropogenic Metals Environmental report IRP UNEP the in published is by humans use to metals linked impacts and human health. A detailed overview of emissions on impact adirect has which mining, gold in Other significantemissions includearsenic dust ’acid or rain’. acid sulphuric to form vapour water atmospheric with reacts dioxide Sulphur concentrates. sulphide of metal smelting the metals is sulphur dioxide, which occurs during to linked emissions critical most of the One involved. steps to fewer the owing production, primary than energy less much requires material production or generally secondary scrap from of metal production the instance, metalsamong different and metallic goods. For greatly vary requirements Energy goods. metallic countries or emerging economies with low to low with economies emerging or countries the dominant exporters, while industrialized naturally are activity extraction high and deposits (known) large with Countries metals. for demand domestic ahigh to satisfy imports on depend now history industrialization early an with countries populated densely that in patterns, settlement human reflects Trade metals in costs. extraction in internalised be costs environmental that desirable is it efficiency, resource and of environmental purpose the for Hence, costs. extraction in may outweigh the environmental component costs energy regional and infrastructure transport know-how, levels, wage etc. Technological risks, emission caps, regulations health concerning taxes, as such regulations, environmental on also but area, of the remoteness or costs energy and water grades, ore as such factors, environmental certain on depend costs Extraction established. clearly not is efficiency resource and between economic efficiency and environmental resource availability advantages, the coincidence and economic with to countries extraction of efficient allocation the supports which metals, in trade of international volume high the Despite International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment , 2013)., 79 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

80 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts (the Great Dyke) produce minor quantities. South Africa exported 96.9 of the 151 tons it produced in in 151 the of 96.9 produced it tons exported Africa South quantities. minor produce Dyke) Great (the Zimbabwe and Montana) Complex, (Stillwater US the Ontario), Complex, (Sudbury Canada cent; per 13 produces Russia’s region Noril’sk production, the of cent 75 for per accounts Complex) (Bushveld Africa South concentrated: highly geographically is mining) (from production platinum Primary Production andtrade resource. anon-renewable is which oil, crude of al. et (e.g. Angerer catalysis cell fuel include platinum for uses important environmentally other Several engines. diesel heavy-duty of catalysis exhaust the in fast-growing and important particularly is use Its emissions. CO2 harmful less to produce hydrocarbons, residual and CO harmful for oxidant an as acts platinum automobiles, of converters catalytic In technologies. green in applications important many has Platinum workers. road of urine and blood the into there from and al. et (Farago dust, road into particularly environment, the into leakage its is converters catalytic from platinum of impacts adverse the of One end-uses. its of many from indefinitely recycled be can Platinum sources. recycled secondary, from was production catalysts auto for platinum required the 2011, rate: in fast of cent 42 a particularly per at growing is converters catalytic automobile of-life end- from platinum of Recycling recycling. through met was cent 251.8 25 per which of tons, metric 2011, In was relevance. demand platinum environmental total the high has that aphenomen market, platinum-consuming growing fastest the are catalysts Auto emissions. car to control legislation of development widespread the following cent, faster, per 5.9 at much grew market catalysts auto the while cent, 2.5 per was From 1975 production platinum of rate to2011, growth annual compound the deposits. nickel and chromite certain in a by-product also is Platinum metals. group platinum other and gold nickel, copper, as such by-products, as metals other contain deposits Many ton. per 2to 3gPt is ores platinum of grade average The platinum. of deposits world’s the prominent contain Zimbabwe and US the Africa, South Russia, Canada, Mathey, and 2012). 16 Johnson cent, tons, per (6 purposes 74 investment for and tons) 2011), 101 in tons (41 demand, of metric cent, per cent (30 catalysts per auto in used jewellery primarily is 14 Platinum by nearly times. production platinum why, exceeded explains 2010, in production gold This deposits. gold than rarer much and uncommon, particularly are platinum of concentrations recoverable economically fact, In gold. than higher slightly is which ton, metric per grams 0.005 is crust al. et to Earnshaw According metal. rare avery is Platinum Illustrative casestudy:Platinum Infobox 4 of iron share Trends to adeclining point metals. traded flows of physical in the change a reflecting rise, the on are trade of metals requirements upstream the that confirms research Recent grades. ore quality to lower- linked requirements upstream larger the given to increase, expected be can trade and environmental burden associated with metals use water. and the Hence, energy material, as such requirements upstream determines grades ore of quality as the significant, is grades ore of declining trend global The the dominant importers. are capita per deposits metal known medium, et al. et Sharifi , 2009; , 2012), and gasoline production, improving efficiency in the use use the in efficiency improving , 2012), production, gasoline and consumption demand in populous countries. high the to satisfy South, and North the in countries populous by less mainly borne being is burden environmental the Nevertheless, relief. environmental and of economic degree certain a offers trade international countries, extracting on burden environmental substantial the Given al. et drawn (e.g. be to Schoer conclusions firm allow not do that results diverging widely –, present two models and hybrid approaches combining the –LCA, IO requirements resource upstream for requirements. calculation The different methods upstream high with associated are which metals, precious and of copper share increasing an and (1997), its average abundance in the Earth’s Earth’s the in (1997), abundance average its , 2013)., , 1998), The market leaders are located mainly in Asia, Europe and North America. North America. and Europe Asia, in mainly located are leaders market The chemicals. or catalysts as such products, platinum-containing of production the in active also are companies these of anumber Quite jewellery. old or converters like catalytic products end-of-life from platinum recycle also which of some companies, different by pursued is purity high for Refining covered. have been would production global of cent per 93 companies, ten top to the extended been had list 32 Website: SO in changes positive of example The on Europe. focusing analysis, flow material metal group platinum a detailed published who (2008), Bringezu and by Saurat estimated metal group platinum produced of ton per eq. CO2 t 35,000 the than higher is figure This gold). as well as rhodium, and palladium platinum, co-produces company the ores, its of nature (owing to the produced metal precious of ton per t CO2 2011 atotal 40,750 of emission reports CO2 producer, platinum primary world’s the largest Platinum, 14064-1, ISO with Anglo-American accordance In PGM). t CO2/kg 39,400 (average PGM ton t CO2/ to 78300 24,800 from ranging emissions GHG and generation water), waste ground fossil (essentially 100 175 to (average are to 255 GJ 143 214 gold), coal) for GJ from compared GJ, to 1612 water m3 (essentially requirements energy produced, (PGM) metal group platinum of kilogram every For al. et (Classen metals of inventories cycle 2.0 life ecoinvent the from available is metals platinum-group of production to the related emissions and uses resource the of inventory detailed A vary. recovery ore of efficiency and depth grades, since to another, mine one from vary Data emissions. waste solid and CO2 contamination, water dust, use, water and energy include Key issues Africa. South in complex Bushveld the at primarily mine which companies, GRI-compliant from available data use water and energy compiled (2009) Glaister and Mudd ores. of to grades low owing waste, of amount a large generate activities Platinum-mining reports. of reviews independent external, involves which –, –’A+ requirements level’ compliance GRI’s highest met having companies from came production global the of cent 37 per guidelines, GRI with line in performance sustainability their reporting 2011 in companies from production came world’s the of platinum cent per Forty-eight Initiative. of components and social guidelinesits using developed operations, specific by theGlobal Reporting environmental the in transparency establishing towards efforts its increasing is industry platinum The Environmental issuesthat mayariseinrelation totheplatinumindustry database, Materials Raw commercial to the according locs: mine platinum of concentration geographic the as high as almost is companies producing of concentration The activities. metallurgical and mining globalAlthough in nature, is dominated the by industry a in handful of platinum engaged companies producers. were platinum-mine US the and Africa South only which of countries, several from tons 54.4 imported Switzerland time, same At the France. and Belgium to Canada, quantities smaller plus Germany, and Japan China, Kingdom, United 2011, in the platinum China, of tons 60 SRA Kong to about Hong mainly exported houses, trading world’s the of largest to some home instance, for Switzerland, production. mine market is There platinum also significant segments. countries amongtradewith noplatinum- the of several or one in engaged to companies home are above mentioned countries the All exports). of 10 (9.6 cent tons, per Switzerland and exports) of 12 per cent (11.7 (15.7 USA Germany exports), of exports), of 16 cent 21 cent tons, (20.8 tons, per per tons, Japan exports), of cent per 34 tons, (33.3 Kingdom United to the directed mainly were exports platinum 2011, in database, African Comtrade South Nations United the in 2011. recorded data to the According sulphur dioxide (SO2). In recent years, this has been mitigated through the recovery of SO of recovery the through mitigated been has this years, (SO2). recent In dioxide sulphur of amounts large generates which ores, sulfide of smelting the is emissions harmful of source Another performances. environmental on impact have apositive which of all frameworks, regulatory and initiatives voluntary technologies, processing in changes to rapid owing analysis, 10 such of years) www.rmg.se 32 in 2011, the five main producers controlled 81 per cent of all global production. If this this If production. global all of cent per 81 2011, in controlled producers main five the 2 emissions presented below shows the importance of a periodical revision (about every every (about revision aperiodical of importance the shows below presented emissions , 2009). International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 2 , which is is , which 81 4.2 Metals trade and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

82 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts various key components of the smelting process. The current SO current The process. smelting the of key components various in 2012, in day modernization per 20 tons to intensive to about thanks 2003 in day 180 per tons about smelter, from Waterval the complex, Platinum’s main Anglo-American from emissions SO2 in reduction major industrial processes. Fossil fuels are still still are fuels Fossil processes. industrial major most and transport cooling, heating, for energy of fossil use widespread by the caused change rising carbon emissions and accelerated climate of that cost, environmental an at comes transition the But input. of energy levels high increasingly requires society industrialized of an sustenance The world. industrial the in consumption and of wealth levels new generated and urbanization, and industrialization underpinned transport to easy were and fashion aconcentrated in appeared that resources energy cheap and al. et (Krausmann harvests bbiomass supplied energy on to rely having from to growth limits strict the overcome societies helped has fuels of fossil stocks of Exploiting energy. sources concentrated and cheap abundant, to access ability by the determined is society industrial to amodern society agrarian an from to transition ability The 4.3 34 33 (Information suppliedbyPatriceChristmann,BRGMFrance) production. platinum future from emissions in reduction significant to a contribute to likely are bioleaching through ores sulfidic from platinum of recovery in developments Technological ores. platinum certain of aby-product is arsenic as activities, metallurgical and/or tailings flotation from arsenic of release the include impacts environmental Other operations. deep of stability geotechnical the improve to backfilling to use likely is therefore and mine deepest the operates which producer PGM integrated an Africa, South in Platinum Northam by pursued only is cement some and tailings with excavations underground old of Backfilling slags. smelter store also that ponds tailing in disposed are tailings These potential. drainage acid low with tailings, becomes ore the of cent per 96-98 Almost mines. Bushveld the of most in thick metre one than less is layer ore-bearing the as rock, barren in resulting dilution ore for except mining, open-pit than rock waste less much generates usually mining Underground unavailable. are rock waste on Data slags. smelter and ore) the of part unused (the tailings processing ore rock, waste mines: to platinum related material waste of streams main three are There producers. platinum among vary Emissions acid. sulphuric of production the in a resource produced by Anglo-American Platinum are 127 metal. of ton are per Platinum SO2 tons by Anglo-American produced the Mining Industry SupplementoftheGlobalReportingInitiativeguidelines.the MiningIndustry auditedeconomic,Anglo-American Platinumisaminingandmetalscompanythatprovidesexternally environmentalandsocialdataonitsoperationsincompliancewith step infertilizerproduction. Sulphuric acidiseconomicallyimportantforseveralindustrialproductionprocesses, includingtheproductionofphosphoricacidfromphosphaterock, whichisacritical , 2008). The availability of abundant of abundant availability , 2008). The Trade in fossil fuels and upstream requirements 33 et al. et Hundermark geographically removed from the major centres of centres major the from removed geographically often are of supply sources large thus density, to population related not is endowment fuel into play. Fossil comes (EROEI) invested energy on return of energy concept overarching the and into account, taken are of exploitation ease the and of deposits quality the when case the global natural endowment. This is especially of the fractions large for accounting countries individual some with uneven, is petroleum and gas natural of coal, distribution geographical the resources, natural other many Like thesupported energy regime globally. and carriers energy of fossil costs lowered artificially have distribution and generation power extraction, fuel fossil for subsidies government Substantial sources. to renewable transition a full makes it until society to modern any vital is them to access ability the and source, energy main the 2 emissions per ton of precious metal metal precious of ton per emissions (2011) report a nearly 90 per cent cent per (2011) 90 anearly report 34 35 direct government subsidies concessions. or tax either receives fuels of fossil consumption and extraction exploration, the countries, many In by 1.4 year. fell per output cent per input required to produce each unit of economic fuel fossil the since terms, relative in decoupled were they to increase), (i.e. continued both terms absolute in fuels of fossil to use the coupled strongly still was output economic while that indicates This annum. per cent by 3.3 per grown has GDP global period, same the Over annum. per cent by 0.3 grown per has use fuel fossil capita per Hence, period. same the in cent per of 1.6 growth population exceeded has fuels fossil of use and 1970.since extraction the in Growth rate) growth annual CAGR (compounding cent by 1.9 grown has per fuels of fossil extraction global The consumption. and of production modes industrial modern –underpins gas natural and petroleum –coal, fuels of fossil use The fossil fuels oftradein The dynamics consumption. affluent societies. of modern, requirements important most the of one for of demand centres and of supply sources between mismatches to overcoming fundamental system, global current the under is, fuels fossil in trade international short, In the 1940s. least at since wars of several course the and outbreak both the to contributors significant been have fuels of fossil trade in to continuity threats Indeed, supplies. these securing in war which has proved an alternative to colonialism/ fuels, of fossil supplies to external access without industrialized have not would economies major Some business. important strategically and large a such is fuels fossil in trade international why Information Information Administration (EIA), 2013). 2012), untilrecentyears, whenthistrendwasreversed(seeU.S. Energy increasingly dependentonimportsofcrudeoil(Gierlinger andKrausmann, up itseconomicdominance. From the1970s onwards, theUSbecame producer ofpetroleumandthelargestconsumer, andthisallowedittobuild United Statesof America was, formuchofthe20thcentury, byfarthelargest enabled ittobuildupanempire(SchandlandSchulz, 2002). Similarly, the far boththelargestproducerandconsumerofcoal, andthis Historically, thiswasnotalwaysso: originally, theUnitedKingdomwasby 35 All of these considerations explain explain considerations of these All } } } } } } } would help to mitigate environmental problems and objectives fiscal and economic achieving to contribute could fuels of fossil production or eliminating for financial support theconsumption objectives.The desired the achieving of method inefficient an is (2011a), it that (2014a)) Bank World asserts which (e.g. of literature IEA amount aconsiderable is there strategies, alleviation to poverty linked While fossil fuel consumption subsidies are often highlighted in the IEA (2011a) IEA the in included: highlighted analysis problematic aspects of consumer subsidies Some 2009. in billion $300 to around decreased 2008 in billion $550 than of more subsidies prices;fuel for example, global consumption fossil with accordance in varying volatile, highly is year given any in of subsidies level total. The global of the cent 25 per than less for accounting typically importers oil with consumers, local to their exporters oil by major given by those fuel consumption subsidies are dominated (2011a) fossil level, global that, the at shows IEA by the analysis Another Support’. Services to 11 ‘General given was remaining cent per The cent. 22 per producers and support cent 67 per received consumers cent), of which per (54 by petroleum dominated was countries OECD from support fuels fossil that showed (2011a) report Agency subsidies energy on Energy International An to quantify. measure (methodologically) the least controversial support Direct subsidies are perhaps the easiest and } } } } } } } imports) increasing (by security to energy Threats importers) fuel fossil (for budgets state on Drain fuel exporters) fossil (for of exports decline of the Acceleration increased fossil fuel consumption) of result (a direct emissions CO2 in Increase to high prices Dampening of global responsiveness demand clean energy investment to of barriers creation and of markets Distortion Encouragement of wasteful consumption OECD states that reforming and and reforming that states OECD International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 83 4.3 Trade in fossil fuels and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

84 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 46 overcome many of the disadvantages that usually usually that disadvantages of the many overcome only the final, upgraded product (electricity)can out” “ship and deposit, to acoal close station to apower site ability The application. main its with high deposits quality in generation, electricity competitive cost be can deposits coal quality low that fact by the explained be part in can 47). This close matching of population and supply Figure (see coal from produced electricity the for of demand centres main the also are they nations, that production. As the three most populous of cent per 64 for accounting US the and India China, with 10 only in countries, occurred 2008 in production coal of all cent per 90 Nearly demand. the geographic mismatch supply between and of narrowness the is carrier energy an as coal of to dominance the factor contributing Another Source: CSIROGlobalMaterialFlowDatabase rate of 1.2 growth per agradual witnessed cent per annum, while petroleum consumption by 2.9 grew gas per of natural Consumption decade). last the in extraction of petroleum stagnation the during faster (and average on by 2.1 grew consumption its year per carriers, energy fossil top three of the one As terms. total tonnage in extraction fuel world’s fossil of the half almost for accounted coal 2008, By 2011; OECD, 2012; 2014b). Bank, World 2011b; (IEA, change climate al. as et such IEA

million tonnes Global extractionoffossilfuels,milliontons,1970–2008 10000 12000 14000 2000 4000 6000 8000 0 1970 1975 1980 1985 Y ear 1990 , 1995 versus poorer quality coals). quality poorer versus (LNG) gas natural e.g. value, liquefied unit higher a in (resulting distances longer over tradable more and weaker much becomes commodity the rates; extraction local high and population) large by a (driven demand local high between nexus of the terms in part, large in explained, be can This nations. populous most the among is States United the only Canada), and States United the natural gas producers (the Russian Federation, However, top three the cent. per 44 among just for top three the and 2008, total in global of the cent per 65 only for accounting largest ten the with producers, major the among concentrated less is production gas, of natural case the In costs. transport high as such resource, grade alower using accompany (see Figure 46). fleets car of private expansion rapid the and in global and requirements, mobility transport growth rapid the despite occurred has fuels fossil to other relative decline its and consumption petroleum in growth subdued relatively The generation. electricity for used fuel dominant the is it where consumers, of coal examples leading are India and China countries. developing of transition energy the in role central its from comes Coal’s decade). dominance last the in all at grew hardly (and annum per cent 2000 2005 Coal Petroleum Natural gas of extraction and low processing requirements requirements processing low and of extraction Ease of deposits. exploitation the in determinant processing phase, a becomes more important and extraction the in EROEI on has it impact the and deposits, competing between quality in difference the cases, such In viable. increasingly becomes trade to international aconsumer, cost final of the component significant a less become costs transport long-distance When of abarrier. less distances long over transport of cost the render values unit High petroleum. for true particularly is This consumption. final high required and quality homogeneous during relatively by the and values, unit and densities energy higher by their explained be extent, large to a can, coal, with compared gas, natural and productionbetween and population for petroleum seen mismatches consistent and strong The tons, 2008 Largest producersoffossilfuels–coal,naturalgasandcrudeoil,million United The rest. the for accounting States) United the and Federation Russian the Arabia, (Saudi global production, and the top three producers of cent 62 per for accounting producers largest ten the with production, gas to of natural that pattern asimilar follows production Petroleum United ArabEmirates United States Iran (IslamicRepof) Russian Fed. Russian Federation South Africa Kazakhstan (Bolivarian Repof) of America Indonesia Germany Australia Poland United States Saudi Arabia China India of America Venezuela Canada Mexico

Kuwait

China 0

0 100 1000 Coal 200 Petroleum 300 2000 400 500 3000 600 category here. Liquids havebeenaggregated intoone’Petroleum’ Original IEAcategoriesofCrudeOilandNaturalGas Source: EA Energy Statistics(IEA,2011a,2011c). United Kingdom Australia exported 20 per cent more than than more cent 20 per exported Australia Russia. and Indonesia Australia, were data, to 2008 according of coal, exporters largest The to (2007). BP according reserves, coal highest the with endowed are producers coal top four to (2011). OPEC according to all this, contrast In reserves, to petroleum respect with top four the producers, only Saudi Arabia was listed among largest four that, of the fact by the indicated also is of petroleum favour in quantity over quality for preference The terms. volumetric in than terms value in greater even is pre-eminence as aimportant globally traded commodity. This more far is petroleum that we see coal, for than lower much is of petroleum production global the Although use. of final of view point the from distance than considerations important more are capacity. refinery petroleum product and have no significant primary the sell countries producer some that 47). Figure (see to noted is It be top producers the among nation populous sole the again is States (Islamic Repof) United States Russian Fed. of America Indonesia Canada Norway Algeria China Qatar Iran

0 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 100 Natural gas 200 300 400 500

Figure 47 85 4.3 Trade in fossil fuels and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

86 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 49 Figure 48 Source: IEA Energy Statistics(IEA,2011a,2011c). to European the 50). Russia’sFigure proximity (see Italy and Germany Japan, States, United the as such countries high-income were importers main the Norway, and and Canada Russia, from sourced were 2008 in exports gas natural Most Source: IEA Energy Statistics(IEA,2011a,2011c). 36 high thermalcomprises coal36, quality half nearly trade coal of international bulk the While Russia. of volume the twice than more and Indonesia, Russian Federation United States Turkmenistan Russian Fed. Netherlands of America to 90%and54%respectivelyformetallurgicalcoal. coal in2010(basedonIEAfigures), howevertheirdegreeofself-reliancefell extraction industries, wererespectively97%and89%self-reliantforthermal An indicationofthisisthatChinaandIndia, bothwithlargedomesticcoal coals andretainthedesiredcharacteristics, butsubstitutabilityislimited. hard metallurgicalcoalcan, tosomeextent, beblendedwithlowerquality size distribution, toallowsufficientairflowwithinablastfurnace. Highquality produce mustbebothstrongenough, andfragmentintotherightparticle coking coalshaveakeyadditionalqualityrequirement, inthatthecokethey production ofironfromore. coal, Incomparisontothermal “hard” The mainuseofmetallurgicalcoalistomakecokeforinblastfurnace Largest exportersandimportersofcoalin2008,milliontonnes Indonesia Largest exportersandimportersofnaturalgasin2008,milliontonnes Malaysia United States Canada Norway South Africa Algeria Kazakhstan of America Qatar Indonesia Colombia Viet Nam Australia Canada China

0 Exports ofnaturalgas 50 Exports ofcoal 100 100 200 150 300 United Kingdom Russian Federation United States Rep ofKorea United Kingdom exports to the US market for similar reasons. reasons. similar for market to US the exports Canada to while Europe, proximity its from stem also exports Norway’s of exports. share large extremely its drives which pipelines, via transport accessible and efficient permits market households (seehouseholds Figure 48). urban and manufacturing power for generation electricity for mainly India, and by Korea followed imports, coal for market the led Japan 2008, In coal resembles petroleum. metallurgical regard this In to market. proximity product for which high is quality more critical than a coal, metallurgical are exports of Australia’s coal of America United States Rep ofKorea Germany Ukraine of America France Turkey Japan Spain Germany Italy France Japan China India Italy

0 20 50 Imports ofcoal 40 Imports ofnaturalgas 100 60 150 80 100 200 Until the 1990s, the region was also a small net net asmall also was region 1990s, the the Until 37 1970s. the in tons to 750 over million compared decades, two past the in tons million 300 around to net exports its reduced has Pacific the and tons. Asia million 450 at petroleum, mainly fuels, of fossil exporter net largest the was Africa 2008, In balance. trade physical of their terms in net exporters were America Latin and Pacific, the and Asia Africa, fuels, of fossil case the In of resources. exporter to anet be aposition in is country the that implies balance trade physical a negative whereas countries other on relies balance trade physical apositive with Acountry territory. own its beyond resources natural on dependency a country’s into insights provides balance trade physical The security import dependency andsupply region andcountry: issuesof Physical tradebalancesby Source: IEA Energy Statistics(IEA,2011a,2011c). Largest exportersandimportersofcrudeoilin2008,milliontonnes of to athird ahalf than less levels at supplied respectively, positions, fourth and third in Emirates, Arab United the and Iran while levels, Arabia’s of Saudi cent per 80 around exporting largest, second the was Russia Arabia. Saudi was 2008 in exporter petroleum largest The Venezuela (BolivarianRepof) imports offossilfuels. Eastern Asia andSouthern Asia regionsbeingstrongly dependentonnet at thesub-regionallevelcanberadicallydifferent, with thehighlypopulous, oil-rich statesoftheMiddleEast, whichcomeunder’Western Asia’. Results Note that ‘Asia andthePacific’ asdefinedinthisreportincludesmostofthe United StatesofAmerica United ArabEmirates Iran (IslamicRepof) Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Canada Norway Nigeria Kuwait

0 100 Exports ofpetroleum 200 300 400 37

500 United StatesofAmerica largest importers. largest importers. third and second –the China and Japan as much as times three almost was which tonnes, million 600 at of petroleum, importer largest the was States United The Arabia’s exports. Saudi for recovery. North America was a net exporter exporter anet was America North recovery. for requiredreservoirs intensive hydraulic fracturing the though reservoirs, sands oil as such sources, productionparticular from ’non-conventional’ domestic production viable, economically in made prices oil Resurgent of demand. mitigation and 2004 since prices oil of resurging result combined the been has decline latest This 2008. by tons million to 500 declined then imports petroleum net but 2005, in tons million 600 under just at peaking imports, net in growth a strong mid-1980s the sparked from 2004 until prices petroleum of low 1979. period prolonged The in crisis shock oil second the during particularly adecade, around for rapidly declined they 1977, until strongly grew imports point which at petroleum America, North In years. 40 past the for fuels of fossil importers net been have hand, other the on Europe, and America North of coal. exports region’s the net increasing also is Colombia from sourced coal of thermal quality A high years. recent in tons 250 million with petroleum, especially fuels, of fossil exporter net important an become has America Latin of coal. importer Rep ofKorea Netherlands Singapore Germany France Japan China India Italy International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

0 100 Imports ofpetroleum 200 300 400 500 600 700

Figure 50 87 4.3 Trade in fossil fuels and upstream requirements International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

88 4. Trade flows by type of resource and their environmental impacts

Figure 51 is nearly 60 per cent of the 12.8 of the cent of tons per 60 billion nearly is 7.5 of approximately tons. This estimate an billion at arriving and model input-output multi-region aglobal using (RME), Equivalents Material Raw as al. et Wiedmann etc.), operations. ongoing for and pipelines, ships, (ports, infrastructure associated of the construction the for inputs energy and material large requires hence and enterprise, ahuge is fuels fossil in trade International fossil fuel trade Upstream requirementsof Source: CSIROGlobalMaterialFlowDatabase year. per tons million 400 1990s to the in astable dependency import its to reduce managed but fuels, of fossil types of all importer anet been has Europe contrast, 1990s. In 1980s the and in coal of significantly most gas, natural and of coal (2013) quantified those upstream requirements requirements upstream (2013) those quantified Physical tradebalancesforfossilfuels5worldregions,1970–2008, trade is potentially less than the requirements in in requirements the than less potentially is trade fuels by fossil generated inputs total upstream the fact, In fuels. fossil in trade were there if avoided be could that requirement material excessive or impost as perceived be not should it substantial, appears requirement upstream the While 2008. in activity economic all with associated extraction resource of tons 69.7 global billion 11 total of about the cent per constitutes It sector. fuels fossil the in trade international of the importance of the indication some giving fuels, RME associated with all consumption of fossil 51). Figure (see petroleum of expense the at largely gas, of natural share the in rise arapid with coal, and of petroleum shares equal roughly importing was Europe 2008, By the U.S. in 2005. It would not be significant at all all at significant be not U.S. would It the 2005. in for calculated EROEI the at produced were it if from gas, 10 natural to 8.3, for significant, less be to 35 21. would from decline decrease The 1999, for EROEI would this average world the at produced were oil If abroad. shipped was it after to 31 mine-mouth the at 80 from coal, for was estimated fall (2010).Hall significant most The and by Murphy studied sources energy different of the of most EROEIs in declines rapid and significant we find cent, 2per at energy transport for value the below). Maintaining footnote 38, (see unit per requirements energy and material upstream its higher the source, of afuel EROEI the lower the that to appreciated be needs It energy. sourced of locally to ascenario compared to be impact this enables (EROEI) investment energy on return of energy concept The commodities. traded the in contained total energy of the cent 2per than less is trade fuels of fossil transport international the in directly used energy the that implies It reported). (where operations transport pipeline all for required energy the and fuels) fossil (not just trade ship-borne international all for used energy includes estimate the as trade, fuels fossil of international requirements energy transport the for limit upper an as taken be can This cent. 2per above countries two only with cent, 0.64 was per used energy transport for 2011d, (IEA, production 2011e).The value median total energy of their cent per 50 than more 17 exported of 17 countries. All sample countries a for estimated was exports, of energy content to total energy the transport, pipeline in used energy the plus bunkers marine international in used of energy ratio The this. for limit upper (2011d) IEA in given an to estimate one allows by sectors use of energy breakdown detailed The fuels. of fossil export and transport international the for requirement energy to direct the relation in occur would reduction significant most energy, the sourced of locally ascenario In below. discussed are aspects study, some of this but scope the beyond is topic of that treatment quantitative anyway. Adetailed, fuel that with associated be inevitably would fuels fossil traded with associated RME of the Most energy. sourced of locally scenario alternative an greenhouse gases. reduced of form in the benefits environmental large equally have would and atransition such support would energy to renewable fuels fossil from exemptions tax and subsidies in A shift installations. and technologies energy renewable around trade international in segment a new create and fuels, fossil in trade and for demand reduced in result would supply energy renewable to Amove decentralized demand. up ratcheting further fuels, of fossil price the reduce to artificially continue will subsidies Fuel countries. developing of urbanization and industrialization continuing rising middle-class consumers created by the by the driven be will demand Future centres. demand and countries of supplier concentration afurther despite traded be will fuels of fossil amounts large that and continue, will fuels fossil for demand strong the that certain almost is It to decrease. expected be could requirements total upstream low EROEI oil from marginal domestic fields, for substituted and to imported, were be oil conventional EROEI, high if Instead, requirements. upstream in increase an implying sands, tar Canadian from sourced share increased the by (2010), explained Hall be and largely can 18 2007 (from and to 12), Murphy in indicated 2005 between US into the imported oil for EROEI in deterioration rapid the Indeed, trade. fuels of fossil requirements upstream the in decrease or increase anet determine that processes extraction/beneficiation and deposits source of characteristics specific the is it that point the to 2.8). to 3 (from sands tar from derived of oil case the in 38 upstream EROEIlevelspriortoexport. transportation wouldhaveondifferentfuels, whichstartoutwithdifferent chosen toillustratethedifferentrelativeeffect impostofinternational be indicativeofcurrentEROEIfordifferentenergy sources. Rather, theywere + 2%)=2.83. NotethattherangeofEROEIgiven herearenotmeantto the oilwillcauselittlechangeaspost-transportation EROEI=100%/(33.3% 33.3% ofthecontainedenergyisusedinjustextractingoil. Transporting = 30.77. Incontrast, forthetarsandexample, anEROEIof3meansthat transporting itinternationally, theEROEIdropsto100% /(1.25%+2%) it tothatstage. Ifwethenuseanother2.0%ofthecontainedenergyin of theenergyequivalentcontainedincoalwasconsumedgetting EROEI of80oncoalatthemine-mouthmeansthatonly1.25%(i.e. 1/80) Using thedefinitionEROEI=GrossEnergy Yield /EnergyExpended, an 38 These estimated calculations illustrate illustrate calculations estimated These International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 89 4.3 Trade in fossil fuels and upstream requirements Credit: DFID - UK Department for International Development, flickr 5. Conclusions

This report assesses international trade with a particular focus on the biophysical flows of natural resources. Global annual extraction and use of natural resources – non- renewable resources such as minerals and metals or fossil fuels as well as renewable resources such as biomass or fresh water – have increased about eight-fold during the past century, and are still increasing rapidly. International trade is growing even faster, and plays an important role in responding to rising demand: it facilitates access to 5. Conclusions resources that are no longer sufficiently available within the countries themselves.

The report focuses on resource use and the 2. What roles do countries occupy in upstream resource requirements of trade, and international trade, where are the centres thereby adds novel information to the discussions of use and demand, and where are on resource use and resource efficiency, the locations of international supply of decoupling and dematerialization. It represents a resources? What factors determine this first attempt to show in a comprehensive way the distribution? scientific literature on trade-related biophysical 3. What are the upstream resource flows, a literature that has greatly increased in requirements, in terms of materials, water recent years. The resources covered are materials and land, of traded commodities? How large (including fossil energy carriers), water and land, are they, how are they composed and how across a time period from 1980 (or earlier, where do they change over time? possible) to 2010. 4. Finally, what can be concluded from the On the basis of the existing literature, it seeks to answers to the above questions about the provide answers to the following questions: contribution of trade to the efficiency of global resource use? 1. How important is trade for supplying countries with resources? How is trade dependency distributed, and how does it change over time?

9191 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

92 5. Conclusions

Figure 52 time? over change trade on dependency does how and resources, with countries supplying for trade is important How value of its exports is higher than the value of its of its value the than higher is exports of its value the when positive is balance trade a country’s terms, economic In balances. trade through is dependency trade at way of looking Another more of little share 20%, remaining the about with next follow minerals) and (metals products mining while mass, traded of all half up make they fuels: by fossil up taken is of trade share to 70%). amount they terms lion’s The monetary in (while to volumes 20% of trade amount only products manufactured trade: international dominate of processing level low a very at Physically, natural resources or commodities has increased. need they resources the with countries supplying for of trade 1.8). importance overall the Thus, of a factor (by degree to alesser but increased, also globally used and extracted of resources 52), of 2.5 amount a factor the Figure (see while by increased 1980, volumes from traded decades three the During traded. tons) 10 are (about billion 2010), in tons billion 15% (65 about worldwide used and extracted resources material all Of Question 1 Physical tradeaccordingtomaterialcomposition,1980–2010

highly critical.becomes too), China, in trade recently but East, Near the in countries several in case the is (which population the to feed suffice not does supply domestic if Nevertheless, domestically. supplied mainly also is material, ubiquitous equally almost an being food, as such Biomass, all. at traded hardly is minerals for construction (limestone and sand), namely extraction, of domestic component However, trade. largest the international upon industrial production are highly dependent of key time, ingredients same the at are, that resources distributed unevenly the ores). Thus of gross part valuable economically the thus and content of metal terms in considered (if to metals applies same the about trade; through reallocated is extracted fuels of fossil volume the 52). of Figure (see Half 10% biomass than being of exports. In general, and for clear economic economic clear for and general, In of exports. weight the than higher is imports of its weight the when positive is balance trade a country’s hand, other the on terms, physical In imports. erages. water andotherbev- largely of(mineral) assigned –itconsists terials couldnotbe group of’other’ma- of proportionally. The egories theyconsist to theresource cat- trade) are assigned (about 20%oftotal ufactured products + exports)/2.Man- measured as(imports 2012; physicaltrade Source: Dittrich, 1962–2010 Persistence andchangeinnet-importingnet-exportingcountries, other At the positive. highly also is balance trade its economically, but States, United the and Korea by EU27, followed importer, largest South Japan, world’s the is it physically, out: stands China ances are countedasexportsminusimports,physicaltradebalancesare countedasimportsminusexports Sources: Physical terms:Dittrich,2012,monetaryUNComtrade,2012;n.b.whiletradebal- 1980–2010 Trade balancesbycontinentinphysical(left)andmonetary(right)terms, 54). and 53 Figures (see zero around balanced regions world other –all balance trade positive aconsistently had Asia while balance, trade monetary negative aconsistently with region world only the was America North decades, past In balanced. fairly is terms economic in trade rates), exchange in changes example, (for reasons of trade. balance monetary neutral abroadly with Brazil), and Federation Russian by the (followed exporter net (physical) largest the is Australia extreme, Australia/Oceania. and America Latin Africa, in pattern the were balances trade physical Negative Asia. and America lately, North and, also (i.e. imported higher volumes than it exported) balance trade positive aconsistently had Europe Physically, common. more much are zero from deviations volumes, trade to physical regard With International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment et al.,2012 Source: Dittrich

Figure 54 Figure 53 93 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

94 5. Conclusions most economies during the past three decades, decades, three past the during economies most in increased has imports material on Dependence market. world the on demand growing the meet to order in volumes export their increasing are they decreasing, is exporters of net number the While Norway). and Zealand New Sudan, the (only exporters net to becoming turned countries few very only 54) Fig. and (see of resources importers net- becoming towards shifted countries many observed, period time the During decades. recent throughout countries importing large remained countries European West the and Japan States, United the to imports, net regard With materials. of suppliers largest the remained and been had islands, Asian South-Eastern the and Australia as well as countries, Asian Central and West countries,American Canada, Scandinavia, South of them. importers net were countries all 70% of while markets, to world the of materials suppliers net 2010, were In countries of 30% all resource producers. fewer ever on relies balance system: its trading global of this vulnerability the it with and rising, is interdependency Global world. the around sharply increasing is commodities vital delivering for market world the on dependence fact, In more than half of their biomass requirements. imported which Kuwait, or Seychelles the as such countries Asian West and islands small mainly 17 (1980: in case the is 9countries), countries unfavourable conditions. bio-geographical This with countries for increased has imports biomass on Dependence requirements. metal of their half than more (1980: imported 75countries countries) 97 and requirements fuel fossil of their half than more (1980: imported 100 countries) 85 countries than more 2008, In metals. and fuels fossil for highest of course is but categories, material all to regard with increased has dependency Import extraction. resource domestic their than faster imports their increased have countries most as their income. The material volumes reallocated of irrespective less or more materials, supplying are countries populated sparsely Increasingly, density. population influence: in gaining is variable another resources, of supply the upon influence of its some losing gradually is income While Source: Dittrich,2012;Assignationaccording toWorld Bank,2011. Countries’ physicaltradebalances(PTB)byincomegroup,1980–2010 oil-exporting (mainly incomes high with countries non-OECD decades, recent In somewhat. changing is However, pattern this suppliers. net were countries other all while of materials, importers net were countries OECD income high- to 1980s, Up the only themselves. among (but more valuable) amount of processed goods asmaller exported and levels, income low had main, the in which, countries from resources of amount alarge imported countries industrial High-income patterns. income followed patterns trade global century, twentieth the Throughout distribution? this determine factors What resources? of supply international of locations the are where and demand, and use of centres the are where trade, ininternational occupy countries do roles Which Question 2 billion tonnes -2,0 -1,5 -1,0 -0,5 0,0 0,5 1,0 1,5 2,0 2,5 1980

1990 2000 resource endowment. Only the 10% the Only most endowment. resource respective for indicator Bank World by the confirmed is as endowment, resource capita per low for aproxy as upon looked be can density Population 1980 2008. and between tripled countries populated to densely sparsely from 56). and 55 Fig. (see China is type of this case spectacular most The dramatically. imports net their increased and importers to being suppliers being from changed incomes lower-middle with countries time, same At the of materials. suppliers important became and market to world the supplies their increased Zealand, New and Canada Australia, as such countries, OECD high-income some and Africa, South and Brazil Russia, as such income, upper-middle an with countries countries), 2010 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment Upper middleincome High income:nonOECD Low income Lower middleincome High income:OECD

Figure 55 95 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

96 5. Conclusions

Figure 56 trade volume, its relative share in total trade has has total trade in share relative its volume, trade regional largest the still has countries income high- between trade intraregional Although trade. of monetary share the in to increase the points 6percentage and trade of physical share the in to increase 11 the points contributed percentage which to China, due is effect of 56). this Fig. Half (see substantially increased trade) monetary in as (as well trade total physical in trade intraregional countries’ 2010,and of developing share the 1990 Ch.2). (see Between nonetheless stronger much become has countries lower-income the of role the countries, lower-income of the rest the from separated are China’s if even activities but trade; world in role astrong acquiring China to due is this part, In countries. developing between way trade to more given has trade world in countries industrial of high-income al. et (Pichler shown has study recent avery As ing toWB,H=high-incomecountries. income in1995,according toWorld Bank.L=low, lower-middle- andupper-middle-income countriesaccord- source: PIKbilateraltradedatabase,Comtrade,Pichleretal.forthcoming.Countriesare classifiedbytheir and importers, net were USA, the like countries, resource-rich most of the Some exceptions. al. et (Dittrich decade past the in markets to world of materials suppliers net been have numbers) (15 absolute in countries countries resource-rich , forthcoming), the dominance overwhelming Global worldtradebycountries’incomegroup1990-2010 2012). Nevertheless, there are also some some also are 2012). there Nevertheless, demand in emerging economies and continuing indemand emerging economies in growth further back, fallen recently have prices too. While providers, resource major became economic power, and high-income countries and political gained countries resource-rich attractive, more became of resources export and extraction aresult, As rose. prices resource to2012, 2000 period the Over expensive. relatively and knowledge-intensive and capital- were North the from products imported the whereas labour, unqualified and resources natural cheap of relatively use the with produced were South the from products basic These materials. raw of providers predominantly were countries use with coincided prices. Developing decreasing resource growing rapidly century, twentieth the During prices. of resource trend the in changes with coincide changes structural recent These 1995,in to 28% and 2010. in 50%in from 40%to 1990, declined, significantly become majorbecome importers. have India, and China like countries, resource-rich but populated densely hand, other the On of materials. exporters net were Latvia, or Guyana like countries, resource-poor relatively some term patterns of ’unequal exchange’ seem to be seem exchange’ of ’unequal patterns term long- the therefore, century, of the turn the Since 3). Chapter (see out stand still Japan and Europe US, the as such countries/regions income consumption of the world’s resources, the high- indirect the and direct the both show which footprints, of material terms in expressed end, receiving At the of resources. suppliers the among place takes mainly show, shift trade this As the consumption-based indicators of global Source: Bruckneretal.(2012) population density) the world1995and2005,bypopulationdensity(HDishigh,LDlow, Raw materialtradebalances(RTB)betweenOECDcountriesandtherestof trade physical on high score consistently general in countries 53), Fig. OECD (see and continents of all balance trade physical positive pronounced most the has Europe trade. via resources of recipients main the as countries income of high- role the is unchanged remains What future. the in prices on pressure upward further to generate likely are growth population -6000 -4000 -2000 2000 4000 6000 RTB 1995and2005,inmilliontons 0

OECD HD

OECD LD 1995

ROW HD

ROW LD

OECD countries have become rather more symmetrical. more rather become have countries developing the and countries industrial income high- the between relations the and century, of the turn the since stronger even become has trend This market. world the to enter and trade their to liberalize started economies emerging several 1980s, the when during occurred already change. Major changes undergoing a certain 54). (Fig. market world the countries increasinglysupply resources todensity low- Non-OECD balances. trade physical positive shown have also, countries, OECD low-density several years, recent in but trade, international resources on through receiving depend matters: high-density countries, particularly, density 56). Fig. and Population 55 (Fig. balances HD

OECD LD 2005 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

ROW HD

ROW LD biomass metals n.met.min. fossil fuels

Figure 57 97 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

98 5. Conclusions

Figure 58 of products, which are multiplied by the value of value by the multiplied are which of products, (LCA) Assessments Cycle Life from coefficients uses approach second The categories. demand to final down economies between and economy the through deliveries inter-industry to trace (MRIO) Models Input-Output multi-regional extended environmentally uses approach first The approaches. two via done is trade in embodied resources of material estimation The decade. past the in efforts research of intensive subject the been have requirements material upstream for accounting Approaches consumption. of final requirements total resource the communicate requirements upstream include that Trade accounts requirements”. material “upstream are product traded the producing for of origin country the in used resources The borders. state cross they time the at have goods the value monetary the or content energy or mass current of the basis the on flows trade consider statistics trade Foreign trade? international of requirements resource upstream the are What Question 3

million tonnes EU27 physicaltradebalance(PTB)andrawmaterial(RTB) 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 -200 200 400 600 800 0 PTB

2000 R TB

PTB

2005 R TB

PTB

2010 R TB

PTB on PTB. on PTB. than RTB on impact astronger expected, be high income and high have, imports as might borders. The consumption levels associated with at goods of the to weight the consumption resource upstream add (RTB) balances trade material raw borders, at weight by their amounts of goods to imported those exported the relate (PTB) balances trade physical While results. different produce therefore methods or combinations of methods, and conclusive;very the studies rely upon different not yet are studies these from findings The consumption). of final country the (and consumer to final the attributed is of products chain life the along use resource all whereby perspective a common feature: they employ a consumption share approaches All approaches. “hybrid” called into so- combined be can approaches two These requirements. land energy, or water material, upstream the to calculate order in goods traded

2012 R TB

Biomass (gross ores) Metal ores minerals Non-metallic materials/carriers Fossil energy 2014 Eurostat, Source:

South America have between 5ha and 8ha per per 8ha and 5ha between have America South and Oceania America, North trade. international to linked is area 16% cropland global of the About person. per land of available amounts high and density population low with countries typically are countries Biomass-exporting 4.1). (Chapter trade biomass in embodied land with deals strand research Another Source: MekonnenandHoekstra,2011.Onlythebiggestgross flows(>15Gm3∕y)are shown. 2005 related totradeinagriculturalandindustrialproductsovertheperiod1996– Virtual waterbalancepercountryanddirectionofgrossvirtualflows of virtual terms in represented be can countries also). Tradebetween products flows industrial for recently more but crops, for estimated (usually water” of water, “virtual called requirements upstream with deals tradition research A specific 3). (Chapter decades recent and have rising been over-proportionally during products traded of directly weight the times four to amount trade in embodied materials upstream that show LCA on methods based Findings true. is opposite the countries low-income for while trade, by direct than rather materials raw in measured when balances, trade positive larger of 50-100% order the in have countries income According to findings basedon MRIOs, high- fossil fuelsdominate the picture. and metals 58). cases, (Fig. all In declined slightly have balances trade both 2005, about Since (PTB). trade of direct balances physical than 40% higher about being as (RTB) balances trade material raw documented has (Eurostat) Office EU 27,For Statistical European the example, for primary productivity) as embodied in trade; trade; in embodied as productivity) primary is, (that to HANPP refer accounts subtle More ofimports biomass produced on land elsewhere. highest the have they and land, available of their productivity to maximum the close are regions latter The less. or 1ha/person only disposal their at have Asia Southern and Eastern East, South person available, while the European Union, 4.1). 3and (Chapters rising are and annually 1600 km3 and 500 of between of magnitude order the to in be estimated are by trade saved to amounts the trade; due savings water global calculate to possible is it Thus, profiles. climatic different with regions in than water more much evapotranspiration, for example, requires high and precipitation of low regions in food analysed as global water producing efficiency: be further can results These domestically. produced been had they if requirement water estimated to their compared else, somewhere production their for water needed have that goods by importing saves acountry water much how determine also can studies water Virtual Australia. and Asia, East South- and South as well as America, South and North in found are exporters water virtual largest The importers. notable also are Mexico and water. Korea, South Japan, of virtual importers net are Africa North and East Middle the Europe, in 59). countries Fig. (see Most calculated be can balances country-level and flows, water International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment

Figure 59 99 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 100 5. Conclusions

Figure 61 Figure 60 faster than direct trade. The environmental environmental The trade. direct than faster rising are trade of metal requirements upstream declining, these problems tend to increase: are worldwide mines of most grades ore the as and manifold, are extraction to metal linked extracted for export. Environmental problems are of them amajority Also, deposit. respective the reduces extraction each and materials non-renewable are metals to biomass, contrast In Source: Dittrich(2012) for indispensable already is trade International productivity. its also but product, atraded for or the amount of agricultural land required of land, amount the captures only not HANPP

million tonnes Top 10netsuppliersandimportersofmetalsintheyear2010 Trading biomass(products):top10net-importingandnet-exportingcountries -600 -400 -200 200 400 600 800 0

Australia

Brazil

South Africa India

Indonesia

Ukraine Russian

Fed.

Sweden

Philippines

Kazakhstan

Spain

Turkey and Brazil are the main suppliers (Fig. 61). (Fig. suppliers main the are Brazil and Australia most. import that regions the are Europe and China) particular (in Asia concentrates; and ores metal as mostly traded, are tons 2.3 billion 1980 in tons to 2008), and in tons 6.7 billion 3.6 billion from (rising extracted being are metals of amounts larger ,ever South. the and North the in density, population alow with countries by borne mainly is extraction of metal burden countries. African North and Eastern Middle particular in regions, world of anumber in nutrition necessary the supplying Saudi Arabia

Malaysia

United States Italy

Germany

Korea, Rep.

Japan

China 2012 Dittrich, Source:

Source: IEAEnergy Statistics(IEA2011a,IEA2011b). (million tons) Top tenexportersandimportersofcoal,naturalgaspetroleumin2008 is of coal importer largest The Indonesia. and Australia are exporters largest the but China, is producer largest the far By petroleum. and gas natural as concentrated as not geographically is Coal rates. growth highest the with and amounts highest the in both extracted being rate of 1.9% annual 1970,an since coal with by grown has use and extraction Their fuels. to fossil pertains demand and supply between mismatch geographical strongest Possibly, the Russian Federation United States Turkmenistan Venezuela (BolivarianRepof) Russian Fed. Netherlands of America Indonesia Malaysia United States United StatesofAmerica Canada Norway South Africa Kazakhstan Algeria of America Qatar Indonesia Colombia Viet Nam Australia United ArabEmirates Canada Iran (IslamicRepof) China Russian Federation

0 Saudi Arabia Canada Norway Nigeria Kuwait Exports ofnaturalgas

50 Exports ofcoal 0 100 100 Exports ofpetroleum 200 100 200 300 400 500 150 300 Russian Federation United Kingdom United Kingdom United StatesofAmerica United States Rep ofKorea Chapter 4.3). Chapter (see balances negative had have regions world major other all while USA, the and Europe for 1970, positive since ever strongly fuels, been have of fossil balances trade physical The importer. largest the is USA the Russia; and Arabia Saudi by mainly exported is oil Crude Germany. and Japan USA, the are importers main the while exporter, an as leads Russia gas, to natural regard With India. and by Korea followed Japan, United States Rep ofKorea of America Germany of America Ukraine Germany France Turkey Japan Spain France Japan China Italy India Italy

Rep ofKorea 0

Netherlands 0 Singapore Germany France Japan China India Italy International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 20

50 0 Imports ofcoal 100 40 Imports ofnaturalgas Imports ofpetroleum 200 100 300 60 400 150 500 80 600 700 200 100

Figure 62 101 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 102 5. Conclusions according to the end use in each country. country. each in use to end the according resources extracted globally of all distribution of the calculation allow which models, output environmentally extended multi-regional input- of help the with calculated are footprints Material consumed. commodities of the of origin countries in the or domestically occur flows resource respective the of whether regardless inhabitants, of its consumption the to satisfy requires country a of resources amount the express footprints footprints”. Material “material of countries’ calculation the is developed recently approach An extraction. material global than faster growing are trade by international exchanged quantities the concerned, are requirements material as far As materials. traded of the 400% 40% and between range requirements resource upstream method, estimation and resource on Depending them. with carry they requirements of upstream burden the and trade) (direct traded of resources amounts the between relation quantitative the to estimate difficult very is it situation, data current the Given China, to build its future. its to build China, case this in country, exporting the allows also but now, UK’s the consumers serves only not argue, might one infrastructure, This them. exporting and producing for required infrastructure the in investments of Chinese account takes also but textiles, of these chain production the in used directly resources all includes only not example, for to UK, the China from imported of textiles consumption the for use: accounting resource in differences on bear to fully differences income brings analysis footprint material The equivalents. material raw associated the and flows trade direct with than pronounced more much is countries high-consumption) countries and lower-income (and high-income between difference the that however, finding common, the in have is do they al. et Tukker with al. Wiedmann et EORA as (such used model the on Depending , 2014), slightly. What differ results , 2013, or EXIOPOL with with , 2013, EXIOPOL or general (i.e. more intermediate goods are traded traded are goods (i.e. intermediate more general in activities trade higher secondly, total trade; in an increasing share of higher-processed goods firstly, growth: this driving be may factors Various water, or method. by whatever materials and in for accounted are they whether rising, part, most the for are, of trade requirements resource upstream that suggests report this in evidence The requirements. resource upstream of dynamics and amount the to describe efforts of existing overview report’s by this distinguished be cannot they below), though (see kind of this mechanisms potential many are There products. of traded volume the than faster to increase requirements upstream cause may mechanisms However, them. other producing for requirements resource upstream the and products traded between relation quantitative the improve gradually should therefore, trade, international in increase markets). The relevant the in for accounted are these that assuming produced, are emissions and of wastes amounts smallest (or, the words, occurs other in wastage least production of commodities in places where the the and of resources extraction the by allowing use resource of efficiency to environmental the contributes trade that suggest would Trade theory use? resource of efficiency global the worsen or improve trade international Does Question 4 conclusive answers. more yield may trade of international properties physical the with dealing indicators and methods to improve efforts research current multiple the time, In undetermined. currently 4is Question to answer the then, analysis, final the In trade. world through processes production and of extraction allocation better apotentially out cancel completely may factors These trade. in embodied water” “virtual in increases corresponding and of crops imports increasing on draw regions arid in demand Finally, population growth and increasing food requirements. upstream in growth driving factor another is transport fuelling for carriers energy good. The increasing consumption of fossil ton of tradable per input energy and material these commodities, since they need a higher for requirements upstream the raise changes 4.3). Chapter (see Such observed be can fuels fossil for (EROEI) investment energy on returns energy declining as well as minerals industrial and metals for grades ore declining time, same the At demand). final satisfying up end they before transport, additional with countries, between International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 103 Questions International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 104 References Law 5, 107–115.Law doi: Environmental International and Community of European Policy. and Review Politics Water Resource and Allan, J.A., 1996a. Water Use and Development in Regions: Arid Environment, Economic Development trade. Ecological Economics 69, 887–894. doi: A.Y., crop M.M., J.A., Hoekstra, Aldaya, Allan, international in water of green 2010. importance Strategic Aarburg/Aachen. Beys, Kathy Stiftung Aachener 2005. Jahr im 224mit Handelspartnern Handel Deutschlands von Güter gehandelten der Rucksäcke ökologischen der und Handels physischen des Welt. Analyse der in M., Naturkonsum 2010. Dittrich, Beys, Kathy Deutschlands Stiftung Aachener Water 36, 545–546. doi: Water 545–546. 36, Ground Deficits. to Regional Solutions Global Resource Water: AStrategic J.A., 1998.Allan, Virtual London. of London, Group). University Study No. 3, SOAS Water Issues Papers (Occasional economies? Eastern Middle short water J.A., for 1997.Allan, solution water”: term along “Virtual Practice. in Management and Allocation Water Policy Issues. Global and Regional of Water Resources: to Closure the J.A., 1996b. Responses Policy Allan, BP, Energy. 2007. of World Review Statistical BP York. New Press, Plenum Pressure. Population Under Change of Agrarian Economics The Growth: of Agricultural E.,Boserup, 1993. Conditions The Hannover. Rohstoffagentur, Deutsche DERA Steckbriefe. 2012.BGR, Rohstoffwirtschaftliche Zinn. 44, 1177–1184. &Technology Science Environmental Perspective. doi: AGlobal UK’s the G., in J.C., 2Emissions: CO Minx, Baiocchi, Changes 2010. Understanding 59, 282–297.Review Economic American The R.U.,Ayres, A.V., Externalities. Kneese, and Consumption, 1969. Production, doi: 69, 2027–2032. Economics Ecological trade. water virtual E., about 2010.Ansink, claims two Refuting Stuttgart, Germany. IRB Verlag, Fraunhofer Rohstoffnachfrage. zukünftige die auf Zukunftstechnologien rohstoffintensiven in Rohstoffbedarfs branchenspezifischen des -Einfluss Zukunftstechnologien für M., Rohstoffe 2009. F., L.,Angerer, G., V., A., Handke, M., Marscheider-Weidemann, Erdmann, Scharp, Lüllmann, Marwede, 18, Ecology 59–70. doi: of Industrial Journal Relationships. Servant Master- A., Murray, J., Uncovering M.,Alsamawi, of Nations: Lenzen, 2014. Footprints Employment The UIT, UK. Open. J.M., Eyes Both J.M., Cambridge, -With Allwood, Cullen, 2012. Materials Sustainable Africa. South of Pretoria, University Perspective. African Southern in: Turton, A World: Soulutions., T., Silent Developing the in (Eds.), R. Politically Henwood, Hydropolitics and Invisible Economically and Deficits Real Regions: Semi-arid in J.A., 2002. Water Resources Allan, 10.1016/j.ecolecon 10.1111/j.1467-9388.1996.tb .2010.06.001 10.1111/j.1745-6584.1998.tb 10.1016/j.ecolecon 00258.x 02825.x References .2009.11.001 10.1111/jiec 10.1021/es .12104 902662h National Academy of Sciences 108, 18554–18559. of Sciences Academy doi: National S.J.,Davis, G.P., Peters, of the K., Proceedings 2011. Caldeira, emissions. of CO2 chain supply The pnas doi: 109, 5989–5994. of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings network. trade water C., I.,Dalin, 2012. Konar, A., N., virtual Rodriguez-Iturbe, Rinaldo, M., global of the Hanasaki, Evolution 45, 4937–4943.Technology doi: & Science Environmental to Consumption. Production in Land Use: Relating of U.S. Land Model C., H.S.,Costello, W.M., Griffin, Matthews, Weber, C.L., 2011.Input-Output and Development Inventory 1625(99)00055-4 the Supply Chain. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 65, 281–295. doi:10.1016/S0040- Along Value Added and Impacts Environmental Between R., L., Relationships Wright, Clift, 2000. Dübendorf, CH. v2.1 data ecoinvent No.10. Inventories, report Cycle Final Life for of Metals. Centre Swiss Inventories H.-J., M., Althaus, Classen, N., Blaser, S., G., Tuchschmid, Cycle M., Jungbluth, Doka, Life 2009. 33, 19–32. doi:10.1080/02508060801927812 Water International products. industrial and agricultural in of trade result as a nations between flows water of virtual assessment an supply: and demand A.Y., of freshwater A.K., Hoekstra, component Chapagain, global The 2008. doi: 108, 8533–8534. of Sciences Academy National the of Proceedings of time. K., S.J., Amatter Davis, 2011.Caldeira, emissions: dioxide carbon for Accounting Wiesbaden. Germany, Office Statistical Federal equivalents. material raw in exports and imports indicator “Raw material productivity” in the National Strategy for Sustainable Development Calculating of the development Further Buyny, (EEA). Š., Accoutning Lauber, U., 2010. Environmental-Economic Wiesbaden. Bundesamt, Statistisches Endbericht. Materialinputindikators. direkten des - Weiterentwicklung Ressourcenschonung und Buyny, Rohstoffproduktivität Š., von S., Lauber, U., Klink, Verbesserung 2009. 576. doi: 576. 22, 568– Change Environmental Global 1995 2005. and between consumption and extraction material –Global trade S., M., C.,Bruckner, K.S., international Lutz, Giljum, in 2012. Wiebe, embodied Materials relation to economic growth. Ecological Economics 51, 97–124. doi: its and use of resource H., S., comparison Steger, Schütz, J.,Bringezu, S., International 2004. Baudisch, Kenya. Nairobi, Programme, Environment Nations supply. United sustainable with consumption J., use: balancing land M., 2014. Herrick, global Assessing H., W., S., Pengue, Schütz, Bringezu, F., M., O’Brien, Garcia, L., R., R., Swilling, Kauppi, Sims, Howarth, 29, 224–232. Policy Use doi: Land of biomass. consumption domestic for use land S., global H., M., O’Brien, 2012.Bringezu, Schütz, Assessing biofuels: Beyond Policies. Greenleaf Pub., Sheffield. and Trends, Visions Global Management: Resource R., Sustainable 2009. S., Bleischwitz, Bringezu, Springer,Raumentwicklung. Berlin. nachhaltige eine für Stoffstromanalysen Wirtschaftsräumen. in S., Ressourcennutzung 2000. Bringezu, .1203176109 10.1016/j.gloenvcha .2012.03.011 10.1021/es 104245j 10.1073/pnas 10.1073/pnas 10.1016/j.landusepol 10.1016/j.ecolecon .1107409108 .1106517108 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment .2011.06.010 .2004.04.010 10.1073/ 105 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 106 References page/portal/environmental_accounts/introduction http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/ URL Document]. [WWW 2014.Eurostat, accounts Environmental Luxembourg. 2013. Guide Eurostat, (EW-MFA). Compilation Accounts Flow 2013.Eurostat, Material Economy-Wide Luxembourg. 2012. Guide (EW-MFA). Compilation Eurostat, 2012. Accounts Eurostat, Flow Material Economy-Wide Luxembourg. Eurostat, 2009. Guide (EW-MFA). Compilation Accounts Flow Material Economy-Wide 2009. Eurostat, Publications(Official of the EuropeanCommunities). EuropeanCommission, Luxembourg. guide. methodological A indicators. derived and accounts flow 2001.Eurostat, material Economy-wide Brussels. Commission, European materials. raw critical defining on group working EU. the for Ad-hoc materials raw 2014. critical on Enterprise, DG Report Commission, European Union. European of the Journal Official Council. of the and Parliament European the 691/2011 No (EU) Regulation accounts. of economic EU, 2011. environmental European on Regulation doi: disconnect global between biomass production and consumption. Ecological Economics 69, 328–334. F.,Erb, spatial K.-H., the Krausmann, Mapping HANPP: W., Lucht, H., Embodied 2009. Haberl, 2, 191–224. Science Use Land doi:10.1080/17474230701622981 of Journal data. census national with consistent 2000 year the for set data land-use resolution 5 min Erb, K.-H., V., F., Gaube, Krausmann, H., Plutzar, A., C., 2007. Haberl, global Bondeau, Acomprehensive London. of London, University Group. Study SOAS Water Issues No. 33. Papers, Occasional Africa. Southern in Security Water Food in A., 2001.Earle, of Virtual Role The Geophysical Research Letters 37, n/a–n/a. doi:10.1029/2010GL043167 P., D’Odorico, drought? to resilience F., Laio, societal reduce of water L., Ridolfi, 2010.globalization Does &Company. McKinsey Practice. Productivity Resource & 2013., Trends markets. survey Sustainability McKinsey commodity Tracking global Revolution: F., J., Thompson, R., S., S., S., Oppenheim, Dobbs, Nyquist, 2013. Sanghvi, Mareels, Resource indicators., UBA-Texte 08/2013. S., M., use Lutter, Giljum, resource S.,Dittrich, C., Polzin, 2013. international and of national Update 79, 32–43. economics Ecological 2005. and 1962 between flows resource global 2: Indirect part trade, H., of international S., M., 2012. Schütz, Bringezu, dimension Dittrich, physical The 69, 1838–1847. Economics Ecological 1962 2005. and between doi: flows 1: global Part trade: Direct of international S., M., 2010. dimension Bringezu, Dittrich, physical The www.materialflows.net/home http:// M., Trade, URL 2012. 2012. Document]. Database: Flow Version Dittrich, Material [WWW Global Dissertation., Kölner Geographische Arbeiten. Universität Köln, Köln. Süden? den in Umweltbelastungen Norden der Verlagert M., 2010.Dittrich, Handelsbilanzen. Physische 10.1016/j.ecolecon .2009.06.025 / (accessed 11.3.14). 10.1016/j.ecolecon .2010.04.023 Input-Output Framework. Journal of Industrial Ecology. of Industrial Journal Framework. Input-Output aGlobal in S., Assessment J., M., Martinez-Alier, Giljum, Footprint Bruckner, 2014, Material forthcoming. Austria. Vienna, Vienna., Institute Research Europe Sustainable 25 Trends years. past Asia: the in over S., M., C., Polzin, S., Bringezu, Lutter, Dittrich, Giljum, S., 2011. productivity resource and use Resource 8, 241–261. Ecology of Industrial Journal doi:10.1162/1088198041269418 of Chile. Example The South: the in Development Economic and S., Flows, Trade, 2008. Giljum, Materials doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00404.x 16, Ecology 365–377. 1870 from of Industrial of Materials Journal toTrade, 2005. Consumption and F., Extraction, S.,Gierlinger, Krausmann, of America: States 2012. United of the Economy Physical The York. New Press, Review Monthly of aContinent. Pillage of the E., 1997.Galeano, centuries Five America: Veins of Latin Open York. New Press, Review Monthly of Underdevelopment. A.G.,Frank, Development 1966. The InstituteManagement (IWMI), Comprehensive Secretariat., Assessment Colombo, Sri Lanka. Water Water International Water Use. Trade Global on of Virtual Trade Impact The Water? Save Cereal D., U., M., International Molden, Does 2004. C. Rosegrant, X., de,Fraiture, Cai, Amarasinghe, science 570–574. 309, Science Use. doi: of Land Consequences Foley, Global J.A., 2005. 9290.2011.00366.x 15, doi:10.1111/j.1530- Ecology 855–876. Industrial Sources. Across Reliability and Art of the State Accounting H., Flow H., H., Weisz, Schandl, Material 2011. of Economy-wide Indicators and Methodology F., M., Krausmann, Fischer-Kowalski, S., Lutter, Giljum, S., Y., Mayer, S., A., Moriguchi, Bringezu, Schütz, Austria. Vienna, Analysis, Systems Applied for Institute 21st the in International Century. Agriculture for F.O.,Fischer, G., M., H., Shah, Velthuizen, van Nachtergaele, Assessment 2001. Agro-Ecological Global 123, Analyst 451–454. The doi:10.1039/a705920e Kingdom. United the in urine and blood in H.T., and soil, Delves, and dust road urban in G.E.M., Hall, concentrations 1998. Platinum M.E.,Farago, P., Kavanagh, R., P.R., I., G., Kelly, Blanks, Thornton, Simpson, J., Kazantzis, J.M., Cook, FAO, 2012. http://faostat.fao.org URL Document]. FAOSTAT [WWW database statistical FAO, 2010: report. Rome. Main FAO, Assessment 2010. Resources Forest Global FAO, 2003. Technical Conversion Factors for Agricultural Commodities. FAO, Rome. FAO,FAO, Ahandbook. Rome. sheets: 2001. balance Food 129–132. 132, Management and Planning of Water Resources Journal Management. and Planning Waterfor Resources Ground New Breaking Water Paradigm: Green and Blue New J., M., The Rockström, 2006. Falkenmark, 15, 1641–1660. Sciences System Earth and Hydrology trade. doi: through savings land and water related and of nations, footprints water agricultural green-blue external and Fader, D., M., H., W., M., Gerten, Thammer, Lucht, J., Heinke, Lotze-Campen, Cramer, W., 2011. Internal .1111772 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 10.5194/hess 10.1126/ / -15-1641-2011 107 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 108 References Academy of Sciences 109, 3232–3237. of Sciences Academy doi: A.Y.,Hoekstra, National of the M.M., 2012. Mekonnen, Proceedings of humanity. footprint water The doi: 15, Change 45–56. Environmental Global trade. to crop relation A.Y.,in flows water Hoekstra, virtual P.Q., Hung, international of resources: water Globalisation 2005b. doi: 15, Change 45–56. Environmental Global trade. to crop relation in A.Y., flows water Hoekstra, virtual P.Q., international Hung, of resources: water Globalisation 2005a. Trade. Crop (No. 11), to International Series. Relation in Nations Report of Value Water Research A.Y.,Hoekstra, Between P.Q., Flows Hung, Water Virtual of Water Trade: AQuantification 2002. Virtual Netherlands. the Delft, UNESCO-IHE, Water Trade. Series. (No. 12), Report of Value Water Research Virtual on Meeting Expert A.Y.,Hoekstra, International of the Water Trade: Proceedings Virtual 2003. 6414–6420. 43, &Technology doi: Science Environmental E.G., Analysis. Trade-Linked G.P., Peters, AGlobal, Hertwich, of Nations: Footprint Carbon 2009. Hydrology 384, 232–244. doi: of Journal model. hydrological aglobal using products livestock and crops major for of withdrawal water T., N., Inuzuka, sources Hanasaki, S.,and T., flow water Kanae, Oki, virtual 2010. of global estimation An ecolind 23, 222–231. Indicators doi: Ecological indicators. use resource to other relation its and and determinants socioeconomic of the human embodied appropriation of production net primary H., J.K., Steinberger, Haberl, Plutzar, C., Erb, K.-H., F., V., Gaube, S., Krausmann, Gingrich, 2012. Natural doi: 104, 12942–12947. of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings ecosystems. earth’s terrestrial in production primary of net appropriation human the M., mapping 2007. and Fischer-Kowalski, Quantifying F., H., Erb, K.H.,Haberl, Krausmann, V., Gaube, A., S., Plutzar, C., W., Lucht, Bondeau, Gingrich, 109, Geography of Journal 119–130.Danish - Tidsskrift Geografisk considerations. system: Conceptual land global the in teleconnections to analyze HANPP Alier, J., embodied Using 2009. A., Martinez- F., H., Erb, K.H.,Haberl, N., A., Krausmann, Schaffartzik, S., Musel, Berecz, Ludwiczek, Ecology. of Industrial Journal 2005. in world the and EU in the recycling and production waste flows, of material assessment An economy? W., F.,Haas, Krausmann, global D., the is Wiedenhofer, M., Heinz, circular 2015, How forthcoming. FAO, prevention. and Rome. causes waste: extent, food and A., 2011. R., U., Meybeck, C., Otterdijk, J., van Sonesson, losses Cederberg, food Gustavsson, Global ; Boston. Oxford N.N., A., 1997. Earnshaw, Butterworth-Heinemann, Greenwood, 2nd ed. elements, of the Chemistry Kenya. Nairobi, Programme, Environment Nations United report. astatus metals: 2011. Group, Working Flows Metal of rates Global Recycling Programme, Environment G., Nations United T.E.,Graedel, J., J.-P., Allwood, Birat, C., B.K., M., Sibley, Reck, Hagelüken, S.F., Buchert, Sonnemann, Flows. UNEP, Nairobi. Metal Global on the Group Working T.E.,synthesis, Graedel, scientific 2010. society: in stocks Metal annurev.energy 28, 275–314. Resources and P.H., doi: of Environment Gleick, Review Water Annual Use. 2003. 10.1073/pnas .2012.03.027 .28.040202.122849 .0704243104 10.1016/j.jhydrol 10.1073/pnas .2009.09.028 .1109936109 10.1021/es 10.1016/j.gloenvcha 10.1016/j.gloenvcha 803496a 10.1016/j. .2004.06.004 .2004.06.004 10.1146/ Biological Sciences 363, Sciences Biological 467–475. doi: B: Society Royal of the Transactions Philosophical Footprint. Ecological future and present humanity’s M., J., J., Loh, Wackernagel, Kitzes, Peller, S., A., Goldfinger, D.,share: Cheng, and Shrink K., Tea, 2008. 104, 140–144. doi: inembodied international trade: Contradictory results from approaches. different Ecological Economics N., F., A., Eisenmenger, Erb, K.-H., H.,Kastner, T., Krausmann, Haberl, 2014. Schaffartzik, area Cropland doi: 109, 6868–6872. of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings food. for requirements land for Kastner, T., M.J.I., Rivas, consequences W., Koch, the S., and diets 2012. in Nonhebel, changes Global 21, Change 947–956. Environmental doi: Global Kastner, T., analysis. S., Erb, K.-H., Aglobal 2011. change: Nonhebel, forest and trade wood International ecolecon production in the Philippines during the 20th century. Ecological Economics 69, 260–269. doi: primary of net appropriation Human of ecosystems: Kastner, T., domination human in Trajectories 2009. platinum Document]. URL http://www.platinum.matthey.com/publications/pgm-market-reviews/archive/ http://www.platinum.matthey.com/publications/pgm-market-reviews/archive/platinum industry. metals group Mathey, 2012. platinum Johnson, global the on 2012, Platinum report Annual 26, 239–244. doi:10.1080/09535314.2014.940856 Research Systems Economic S., databases. A., of 2014. Owen, MRIO Inomata, evaluation Comparative Geneva. Organization, Labor ILO International employment. in by status occupation, by activity, by economic level, general ILO, 2014. Employment (annual). statistics -main LABORSTA Summit (Cannes, 3-4 November 2011). 14-15 (Paris, Governors Bank 2011) Central and October Ministers of Finance G20 the and G20 Meeting the for Prepared Toronto and Commitments. G20 Pittsburgh of the update An subsidies: energy other and fossil-fuel on Bank 2011. World Bank, OPEC, and OPEC, World OECD byIEA, IEA, report Joint 2011e. countries. IEA, of Non-OECD balances Energy 2011d. countries. IEA, of OECD balances Energy 2011c. countries. IEA, of Non-OECD statistics Energy worldenergyoutlook/resources/energysubsidies http://www.iea.org/publications/ URL Document]. 2011b.IEA, [WWW Subsidies Energy 2011a.IEA, countries. of OECD statistics Energy Johannesburg. Metallurgy, and of Mining Institute African Southern Pyrometallurgy. R.T., in: update, Jones, an business: P. platinum Hoed, American’s den Anglo African (Eds.), Southern L.P. R.J., S.B., Villiers, Mncwango, de L.R., vS., 2011.Hundermark, Nelson, of operations smelting The S0921-8009(02)00257-4 44, 137–151. Economics Ecological activities. trade of international footprints) doi:10.1016/(ecological appropriation land to estimate analysis input–output physical S., K., Applying 2003. Giljum, Hubacek, 1114 –1117. doi: –1117. 1114 A.Y.,Hoekstra, 344, T.O., Science footprint. Wiedmann, environmental 2014. unsustainable Humanity’s 10.1073/pnas -2012/ .2009.08.019 10.1126/science .1117054109 10.1016/j.ecolecon .1248365 .2013.12.003 10.1098/rstb 10.1016/j.gloenvcha / (accessed 1.27.15)./ (accessed .2007.2164 .2011.05.003 International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment -2012/ [WWW -2012/ [WWW 10.1016/j. 109 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 110 References International Resource Panel. UNEP United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi, Kenya. Nairobi, Programme, Environment Nations United UNEP Panel. Resource International to the Water Efficiency on Group Working of the economy, AReport agreen in use water Measuring R., B., Edens, Schulte, Weber,A., J.L.,Martinez-Lagunes, P.,Wiren-Lehr, S., Alfieri, von Gee, D., 2012. S., Berger, M., C., A.Y., Farell, M., K., Hyde, Hoekstra, Wackernagel, R., J., Mathews, Liu, E., Ercin, J.M.,McGlade, Werner, G.,M.M., B., D., Aldaya, Young, Pfister, Sonnemann, M., M., Jefferies, Matlock, Austria. (SERI), Vienna, Institute Research inembodied European and of exports imports agricultural and forestry products. Sustainable Europe B., S., M., Bruckner, 2011. Giljum, Lugschitz, land actual the on Astudy demand: land Europe’s global 384, 187–197. water. of Hydrology blue and Journal doi: Green cropland: in uses water consumptive J., of global Liu, Yang, H., assessment 2010. explicit Spatially 0.1080/09535314.2013.769938 doi:1 25, 20–49. Research Systems Economic Resolution. Sector and Country High at Database Output Input- M., D., Multi-Region Lenzen, A., Moran, K., 2013. Kanemoto, aGlobal Geschke, Eora: Building drives threats biodiversity in developing nations. Nature 486, 109–112. M., D.,Lenzen, Moran, K., B., Kanemoto, L., A., Foran, 2012. Lobefaro, Geschke, trade International UK. London, Affairs, International B.,Lee, F., Preston, Kooroshy, J., of Bailey, G., R., Institute Royal 2013. Lahn, Futures. Resources pnas 108, 3465–3472. doi: of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings scarcity. land Lambin, E.F., Meyfroidt, P., 2011. Global land use change, economic globalization, and the looming 4, doi:10.1080/17474230802645568 15–33. Science patternsgeographical of the global human appropriation of production? net primary Journal of Use Land F.,Krausmann, H., Erb, K.-H., Haberl, M., V., Wiesinger, Gaube, determines S., What 2009. Gingrich, doi: 2705. in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century. Ecological Economics 68, 2696– F., S., N.,Krausmann, Eisenmenger, Erb, K.-H., M., H., Gingrich, Growth 2009. Fischer-Kowalski, Haberl, 12, 637–656. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00065.x Ecology Industrial of Journal Future Their Trajectories. and Profiles Metabolic Present Transition: and Past Krausmann, F., Fischer-Kowalski, M., Schandl, H., Eisenmenger, N., 2008. The Global Sociometabolic pnas 110, of Sciences Academy 10324–10329. National of the Proceedings century. 20th doi: Searchinger, T.D., 2013. Global human appropriation of production net primary doubled in the F., V.,Krausmann, A., H., Gaube, S., Erb, K.-H., C., Bondeau, Haberl, Lauk, Gingrich, Plutzar, C., envsci 29, & Policy doi: 71–80. Science Environmental dimension. policy its and accounting flow material economy-wide in equivalents J.,Kovanda, material of J., raw Weinzettel, 2013. importance The 47. Research Water Resources doi:10.1029/2010WR010307 network. trade water virtual global I.,Konar, 2011. A., N., M., Rodriguez-Iturbe, C., Rinaldo, S., Dalin, Suweis, Hanasaki, The Water food: for 4, doi: 223–228. Research Pollution and Science W., state. Environmental Klöpffer, to current the 1997. beginning From the assessment: cycle Life .1100480108 .1211349110 .2013.01.005 10.1016/j.ecolecon .2009.05.007 10.1007/BF 02986351 10.1016/j.jhydrol .2009.11.024 10.1073/ 10.1073/ 10.1016/j. doi: 108, 8903–8908. of Sciences Academy National of the 1990 Proceedings to from 2008. trade G.P.,Peters, J.C., Minx, Weber, C.L., Edenhofer, O., international 2011. via transfers emission in Growth “Prebischecological thesis.” Ecological Economics 59, 519–529. doi: Towards an perspective: aphysical from trade international Colombian 2006. M.A., Pérez-Rincón, URL http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/data_graphs/330.htm Document]. 2013 5August [WWW Accessed OPEC, 2011. Reserves. Oil Crude of World Share OPEC 203–209. 49, &Technology Water Science resources. water world T., and Oki, trade water S., Virtual Kanae, 2004. Paris. 2013. fuels fossil OECD, for expenditures tax and support OECD, 2012. budgetary of estimated Inventory Paris. OECD, Guide. OECD I. The Volume Productivity. Resource and Flows Material Measuring OECD, 2008. 1185, of York Sciences New Academy 102–118. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05282.x of the Murphy, Annals D.J., invested. (energy) C.A.S., on Hall, 2010. return energy or Year review-EROI in 9290.2009.00154.x 13, Ecology 881–897. of Industrial Journal doi:10.1111/j.1530- America. Latin for Evidence Empirical Trade: P., of International Muñoz, Equivalents S., Material J., Raw Roca, The Giljum, 2009. Society, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada. Metallurgical of Canadian Metallurgists”. “48th Proc. Conference Mining. Annual Sustainable In Study Case Excellent An Mining: of Platinum-PGM Costs G.M.,Mudd, Glaister, B.J., Environmental The 2009. 35, 98–115. Policy Resources constraints. doi: looming and key mega-trends Australia: in of mining G.M., sustainability Mudd, 2010. Environmental The s10230-008-0037-5 27, Environment the Water and Mine 136–144. Mining. Sustainable Water doi:10.1007/ and Embodied of Assessment aPreliminary Water Resources: and Reporting G.M., Sustainability Mudd, 2008. Carbon Energy Technologies. Publications of Office the European Union, Luxembourg. Low- in Bottlenecks Supply-Chain as Metals Rare Sector. Assessing EU Energy of the Decarbonisation Path the towards the K., in C., 2013. Metals Ostertag, A.,Soulier, Sartorius, M., Critical Lüllmann, R.L.,Moss, Tzimas, E., P., Willis, F., J., L., Tercero Marscheider-Weidemann, Arendorf, Espinoza, 4.2014.935298 26, 245–261. Research Systems doi:10.1080/0953531 Economic accounts. carbon consumption-based openEU’S and D.,Moran, WIOD, EXIOBASE, Eora, Wood, R., the 2014. between Convergence pnas 107, of Sciences Academy National of the 20917–20922. Proceedings use. of land doi: P.,Meyfroidt, T.K., Rudel, E.F., displacement Lambin, global the and trade, 2010. transitions, Forest 106, 16139–16144. of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings doi: abroad. of deforestation P., displacement and Meyfroidt, E.F., Vietnam in Lambin, transition Forest 2009. Netherlands. Water for Education, Institute UNESCO-IHE consumption. and of production footprint A.Y., M.M., Hoekstra, Mekonnen, water grey and 2011. blue green, the accounts: footprint water National 10.1073/pnas .1014773107 .1006388108 10.1016/j.resourpol (accessed 2.17.15). (accessed .2009.12.001 10.1016/j.ecolecon International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 10.1073/pnas 10.1073/ .0904942106 .2005.11.013 111 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 112 References trade flows of the European Union. Wuppertal Institute., Wuppertal. Wuppertal Union. European of the flows trade Material burden. environmental shifting the and S., H., S., Moll, Globalisation Bringezu, 2004. Schütz, Technology 47, 14282–14289. doi: & Science LCI-IO. Environmental Hybrid and Analysis Input–Output of Multi-Regional Level: Comparison Schoer, K., aMacro- on Wood, R., I., J., Arto, Weinzettel, Equivalents 2013. Material Raw Estimating Economics 55, doi: 309–320. Ecological economy. global the and consumption Unsustainable quantities: Schor, and J.B., Prices 2005. doi: 8903–8909. 46, &Technology Science Environmental Results. and Method, Calculation –Concept, Union European Schoer, C., J., K., J., Weinzettel, J., of the Kovanda, 2012. Lauwigi, Giegrich, Consumption Material Raw data. Environmental Research Letters 4, 044003. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/044003 satellite MODIS from extent urban Potere, M.A., A., D., Friedl, Schneider, of global map Anew 2009. S0921-8009(02)00031-9 41, Economics day. 1850 203–221. from Ecological to present the doi:10.1016/ land-use and metabolism of society’s terms in relations Kingdom’s natural United the in H., N., Schulz, 2002.Schandl, Changes 26, 87–97. Change Environmental doi: flows, 1950–2010. material Global of global trends and patterns Regional transition: metabolic A., Mayer, S., N., Eisenmenger, Loy, A., Gingrich, F., C.,Schaffartzik, Krausmann, 2014b. global The 18, Ecology 102–112.Industrial doi: 1995-2007. Equivalents of Material Raw in Journal Trade Consumption and Austrian Accounting: Flow F., N., A., Eisenmenger, Krausmann, H., Material Weisz, 2014a.Schaffartzik, Consumption-based j.1530-9290.2008.00087.x 12, Ecology 754–767. of Industrial Journal Impacts. doi:10.1111/ of Environmental Shifting and Industry, 1: in Supply, Use Part of Europe, Global Flows Metal Group S., Platinum M.,Saurat, 2008. Bringezu, 44, Research Resources n/a–n/a. doi:10.1029/2007WR006331 Water agriculture. in use water Global system: water global on the influence its and consumption water blue and D., A., W., Lucht, S.,Rost, green Gerten, Bondeau, Rohwer, S., Agricultural J., 2008. Schaphoff, doi: 75, 135–139. Economics Ecological trade. water Reimer, J.J., 2012. of virtual economics the On D.C. Trade. and Washington USDA, Consumption Food (Ed.), A. of Global Regmi, 2001. Structure Changing Natural Capital: The Ecological Economics Approach to Sustainability. Island Press., Washington. Economy., M. (Ed.), Human of in: the in Jannson, Investing Requirements Capital Natural the Measuring Capacity. Carrying Appropriated W.E., and Rees, M., Footprints 1994. Wackernagel, Ecological Chile. de Santiago ECLAC, Problems. Principal Its and America of Latin Development Economic 1950 title: The in the with English in Published problemas. principales sus de yalgunos Latina América la de económico R., 1949.Prebisch, desarrollo El N.Y. Armonk, 1400 M.E. Sharpe, to present. the economy, world the and culture, society, created: K., trade that Topik, world Pomeranz, S., The 2006. 10.1016/j.ecolecon 10.1021/es .2012.01.011 300434c 10.1016/j.ecolecon 10.1021/es 10.1111/jiec 10.1016/j.gloenvcha 404166f .12055 .2005.07.030 .2014.03.013 Experiencing Serious Drought and/or Desertification, Particularly in Africa. UN. Africa. in Particularly Desertification, and/or Drought Serious Experiencing Countries in Desertification to Combat Convention International of an 1994.UNCCD, Elaboration un.org http://comtrade. URL Document]. [WWW Database Trade Statistics |International n.d.UN, Comtrade UN 01363 134. 001103), (No. UBA-FB Texte UBA 02/08. Forschungsbericht Analyse. politische weitere die für Ressourcenverbrauchs des Kennzahlen fehlenden und Erstellung Begriffsbestimmungen. und Berechnung von eines zum Glossars „Ressourcenbegriff“ Kennzahlen –aktuelle Deutschland von S., U., Ressourcenverbrauch H.,UBA, 2008. Bringezu, Schütz, Outlook. Economic Systems Research 25, 1–19. doi:10.1080/09535314.2012.761179 and Introduction an Frameworks: Tukker, Input-Output E., A., Dietzenbacher, 2013. Multiregional Global consumption calculated with EXIOBASE 2.1. Leiden/Delft/Vienna/Trondheim. final and trade in embodied water, materials and Carbon, land of Nations. Footprint Resource Global The Tukker, T., A., Bulavskaya, S., A., Koning, Lutter, de Giljum, S., M., Simas, Stadler, K., Wood, R., 2014. doi: 8, 758–769. of Hydrometeorology Journal Data. Model and Observational Using Cycle Annual Its and K.E.,Trenberth, L., T., Smith, Qian, J., A., Dai, Fasullo, 2007. Water Budget Global of the Estimates Geophysical Research Letters 38, n/a–n/a. doi:10.1029/2011GL046837 GVWTN. THE OF CONTROLS AND STRUCTURE network: trade water virtual global of the controls S., I.,Suweis, Konar, 2011. A., N., M., Rodriguez-Iturbe, C., Rinaldo, Dalin, Hanasaki, and Structure International Trade. Environmental Science& Technology 46, 10883–10891. doi: through Displacements and Production, Consumption, Union: European the for Accounts Footprint E.G., J., K., G., Weinzettel, 2012. A.E., Cranston, Ercin, Water Hertwich, and Steen-Olsen, Land, Carbon, 40, 473–485. Review Economic American countries. borrowing and investing Singer, H.W., between gains of the 1950. distribution The doi: n/a–n/a. Ecology of Industrial Journal Emissions. Gas Greenhouse for Implications and Productivity Energy E., and M., Trade: 2014b. in of Labor Simas, Wood, R., Role The Hertwich, Embodied Labor 6, 7514–7540. Sustainability doi: of Globalization. Impacts Social the Quantifying E., Footprint: M., 2014a. L., Wood, M., R., Labor” Huijbregts, “Bad Hertwich, Simas, Golsteijn, The jhydrol 384, 198–217. of Hydrology Journal irrigation. doi: without losses production potential as well as production crop global in contents water S., P., Döll, virtual Siebert, green and blue 2010. Quantifying 11–32. doi:10.1080/02508060008686794 25, Water International Water Resources. of World Assessment and Appraisal I.A., 2000. Shiklomanov, 8912. doi: 6, 8904– ACS Nano Nanotubes. Carbon Nitrogen-Doped in Functionalities of Nitrogen by Transformation Sharifi, T.,Hu,G., X., Reactions Jia, Wågberg, Reduction T., 2012.Oxygen for Sites Active of Formation 2.17.15). (accessed 2011.SERI, materialflows.net 10.1175/JHM 10.1111/jiec / (accessed 11.12.14). (accessed / .2009.07.031 10.1021/nn .12187 600.1 302906r . 2011 Version [WWW Document]. URL http://www.materialflows.net/home URL Document]. . 2011 [WWW Version International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 10.1021/es 10.3390/su 301949t 6117514 10.1016/j. / 113 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 114 References 9290.2011.00378.x 15, Ecology 893–907. doi:10.1111/j.1530- of Industrial Journal Republic. Czech of the Case The Consumption: J., Material of Raw Weinzettel, J., Kovanda, 2011. Analysis Decomposition Structural j.1530-9290.2009.00144.x 13, Ecology 607–621. of Industrial doi:10.1111/ Journal Republic. Czech of the Case The Assessment: Cycle Life Hybrid Through Metabolism Socioeconomic J.,Weinzettel, J., Kovanda, Assessing 2009. gloenvcha the global displacement of land use. Global Environmental Change 23, doi: 433–438. E.G., J., G.P., Peters, Weinzettel, Hertwich, A.,drives K., 2013. Galli, Steen-Olsen, Affluence catalyst bioregional series. New Publishers, Society Island, Gabriola BC New earth, the on impact human reducing M., W.E., footprint: Rees, Wackernagel, 1996. ecological Our increasing “land-grabbing”outside of Europe?, OPERA report. Research prevent efficiency more Can trade: and S., H.,Von production 2010. Witzke, Noleppa, EU agricultural 34, 261–269. A/B/C doi: Parts Earth, of the Chemistry and Physics Program. Linking River of India’s context National the in trade water of inter-state virtual analysis P., Zaag, D.A., der S., van Verma, A.Y., Kampman, Hoekstra, critical flow: A the against Going 2009. Nairobi. Panel, Resource International UNEP Cycles. and Flows Metals of Anthropogenic Challenges and Risks Voet,Van M., R., der G., E., Eckelman, Mudd, T., Norgate, Salminen, R., Hischier, 2013. Environmental Denmark. Agency, Copenhagen, Environment European 1995–2005. between trade international through land-use flows:agricultural EU land M., Trends 2009. Sleen, EU virtual Van in der 56. paper Working WWWforEurope Progress., Welfare/ of Social J., M., Bergh, Measures Van as to Antal, den 2014. GDP Alternatives Evaluating 2.14.15). (accessed http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=32&t=6 URL Document]. [WWW sources? foreign from comes States (EIA), 2013. United the in Administration FAQ: consumed oil Information U.S. much How Energy Press,Cambridge University Cambridge. UNU-IHDP, UNEP, toward sustainability. 2012. progress 2012. Report Wealth Measuring Inclusive Paris. Programme, Environment Nations United Panel. Resource International of the Report growth, economic from impacts S., environmental and Sewerin, 2011. use resource natural Decoupling F.,Krausmann, P., S., N., Eisenmenger, Hennicke, Giljum, P., A., Lankao, Romero Manalang, Siriban UNEP, M., M., Weizsäcker, von Swilling, E.U., Fischer-Kowalski, Y., Ren, Y., Moriguchi, W., Crane, greeneconomy/GreenEconomyandTrade http://www.unep.org/ URL Document]. UNEP, Trade 2013. [WWW and /Main Economy Green 1.3.13). http://unctadstat.unctad.org/ENUNCTAD, URL Document]. 2013. UNCTADstat [WWW 2012. Report UNCTAD, Africa. in Geneva. Development Economic Africa. in Development UNCTAD, 2012. Sustainable and Transformation Structural Geneva. UNCTAD, 2007. Regional cooperation for development. Trade and Development Report, 2007. UNCTAD, .2012.12.010 (accessed 2.17.15). (accessed 10.1016/j.pce .2008.05.002 ; Philadelphia, PA. 10.1016/j. / (accessed / (accessed

wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/wtr03_e.htm http://www. URL Document]. [WWW Trade 2003. development. and Trade World WTO, 2003. Report Governors. Bank Central and Ministers to G20 Finance Bank World by the Contribution consumption. wasteful encourage that subsidies World Bank, 2014b. Transitional policies to assist the poor while phasing out inefficient fossilfuel World Bank, 2014a. World Development Indicators. World Bank, Washington D.C. 1.2.13). (accessed http://data.worldbank.org/indicator URL Document]. 2012. Bank, [WWW World |Data Indicators Washington D.C. 21st the for Bank, World Capital Century. Measuring of Nations? Wealth the is Where 2006. Bank, World World Bank, 2003. World Development Indicators. World Bank, Washington D.C. 213,American Scientific 179–190. of Cities. A., 1965.Wolman, Metabolism The doi: 49–63. 66, Water Management Agricultural advantages. comparative by considering enhanced be can water of virtual relevance D., policy The 2004. Wichelns, 3774(00)00134-7 49, 131–151. Water Management Agricultural Egypt. from example an with goals, doi:10.1016/S0378- national other and security food to achieve efforts in D., water” 2001.Wichelns, of “virtual role The 1937–1945. doi: 1937–1945. 70, Economics Ecological analysis. input–output multi-region for requirements institutional and data T.,Wiedmann, H.C., Wilting, M., Lenzen, Lutter, S., V., Palm, 2011. Methodological, Vadis MRIO? Quo 201220362. of Sciences Academy National of the Proceedings of nations. footprint T.O.,Wiedmann, H., M., D., Lenzen, Moran, Schandl, S., Suh, West, J., K., Kanemoto, 2013. material The 4.2012.761596 25, 143–156. Research Systems Economic doi:10.1080/0953531 UK. the from –experiences databases MRIO extended T., of environmentally J.,Wiedmann, Barrett, 2013. applications Policy-relevant ecolecon 69, 211–222. Economics Ecological doi: accounting. resource and emission based consumption- for used models input–output T., multi-region Wiedmann, of recent Areview 2009. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00504.x 16, Ecology 636–646. of Industrial Journal 1995 2005. and of Trends Between Assessment Input-Output AMultiregional Economies: Trade of Emerging International K.S., S., M., C., the Bruckner, in Wiebe, Lutz, Giljum, C., Polzin, Embodied 2012. Materials and Carbon /07900627.2011.597833 27, Development 607–619. of Water Resources Journal doi:10.1080 International Security. Food Ensuring or Water Management D., Improving in 2011b.Wichelns, Helpful Be Not Will Water Footprints Assessing 20, 171–175. Society and Science for Perspectives Ecological - GAIA Flawed. Notably But D., Notions, 2011a.Wichelns, Compelling Water Footprints. Water and Virtual Resources Management 24, 2203–2219. doi:10.1007/s11269-009-9547-6 Water Criterion. Policy aSufficient not but D., Perspective, 2010. Water:Wichelns, AHelpful Virtual .2009.08.026 10.1016/j.ecolecon .2011.06.014 (accessed 2.17.15). (accessed 10.1016/j.agwat International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment .2003.09.006 10.1016/j. / 115 References International TradeInternational inResources: A biophysicalassessment 116 References degradation Ecological in Economics drylands. 69, 310–318. doi: soil human-induced from resulting production primary of net M., loss Zika, Erb, K.-H., global The 2009. Environmental Change 23, 1178–1186. Change Environmental doi: Global use. Yu, land Y., to global K., consumption 2013. K., Feng, local Hubacek, Tele-connecting Environmental Science & Technology 46, 1796–1803. doi: Water Trade. Virtual Yang, Global Z., on Mao, X., B., X., Zhao, Analysis Chen, 2012. Network Ecological 30, 1413–1430. Development World Countries. doi:10.1016/S0305-750X(02)00047-5Mediterranean Southern for Study Yang, ACase H., Import: Food Zehnder, and A.J.., 2002. Water Scarcity doi:10.1029/2007WR006048 n/a–n/a. 43, Research Water Resources OPINION. management: resources water Yang, integrated in H., concept Zehnder, A., 2007. water”: unfolding An “Virtual doi:10.1068/a3352 A33, 79–95. Planning and Environment trade. and supply grain for Yang, H., implications and Zehnder, A., 2001. scarcity water China’s regional doi: 10,443–454. Sciences System Earth and Hydrology trade. food international in the efficiency use water of Yang, H., Wang, L.,assessment an trade: water K.C., Abbaspour, Zehnder, Virtual A.J.B., 2006. es 37, &Technology doi: Science 3048–3054. Environmental Security. Food for Implications Its P.,Yang, H., and Reichert, K.C., Abbaspour, Threshold Zehnder, A.J.B., AWater Resources 2003. aspx?Language= http://stat.wto.org/Home/WSDBHome. URL Document]. WTO, 2012. [WWW database Statistics 0263689 10.5194/hess -10-443-2006 (accessed 1.2.13). (accessed 10.1016/j.gloenvcha 10.1021/es .2013.04.006 10.1016/j.ecolecon 203657t .2009.06.014 10.1021/ About the UNEP Division of Technology, Industry and Economics

Set up in 1975, three years after UNEP was created, the Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE) provides solutions to policy-makers and helps change the business environment by offering platforms for dialogue and co-operation, innovative policy options, pilot projects and creative market mechanisms.

DTIE plays a leading role in three of the seven UNEP strategic priorities: climate change, chemicals and waste, resource efficiency.

DTIE is also actively contributing to the Green Economy Initiative launched by UNEP in 2008. This aims to shift national and world economies on to a new path, in which jobs and output growth are driven by increased investment in green sectors, and by a switch of consumers’ preferences towards environmentally friendly goods and services.

Moreover, DTIE is responsible for fulfilling UNEP’s mandate as an implementing agency for the Montreal Protocol Multilateral Fund and plays an executing role for a number of UNEP projects financed by the Global Environment Facility.

The Office of the Director, located in Paris, coordinates activities through ¢¢ The International Environmental Technology Centre - IETC (Osaka), which promotes the collection and dissemination of knowledge on Environmentally Sound Technologies with a focus on waste management. The broad objective is to enhance the understanding of converting waste into a resource and thus reduce impacts on human health and the environment (land, water and air). ¢¢ Sustainable Lifestyles, Cities and Industry (Paris), which delivers support to the shift to sustainable consumption and production patterns as a core contribution to sustainable development. ¢¢ Chemicals (Geneva), which catalyses global actions to bring about the sound management of chemicals and the improvement of chemical safety worldwide. ¢¢ Energy (Paris and Nairobi), which fosters energy and transport policies for sustainable development and encourages investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency. ¢¢ OzonAction (Paris), which supports the phase-out of ozone depleting substances in developing countries and countries with economies in transition to ensure implementation of the Montreal Protocol. ¢¢ Economics and Trade (Geneva), which helps countries to integrate environmental considerations into economic and trade policies, and works with the finance sector to incorporate sustainable development policies. This branch is also charged with producing green economy reports.

DTIE works with many partners (other UN agencies and programmes, international organizations, governments, non-governmental organizations, business, industry, the media and the public) to raise awareness, improve the transfer of knowledge and information, foster technological cooperation and implement international conventions and agreements.

For more information, see www.unep.org The availability and accessibility of natural resources is essential for human well-being. Natural resources are unevenly distributed, and the limits to their availability in many parts of the world are becoming increasingly visible. International trade has played an important role www.unep.org in delivering resources from centres of supply to centres of demand. United Nations Environment Programme P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, 00100 Kenya Tel: (254 20) 7621234 In the past few decades global efforts have Fax: (254 20) 7623927 been channelled to enforce sustainable E-mail: [email protected] management strategies for natural resources, web: www.unep.org increase resource and environmental efficiency and thus, overall human well-being. In such a context, what role does international trade For more information, contact: play in increasing resource efficiency, reducing environmental impact and promoting equitable International Resource Panel and inclusive growth? Secretariat, Division of Technology, Industry Through a comprehensive review of updated and Economics, data and existing literature, the latest United Nations Environment assessment from the International Resource Programme, Panel International Trade in Resources: A 15 rue de Milan, Biophysical Assessment examines the rapid growth and pattern changes of resource 75441 Paris Cedex 09, France trade and analyzes the upstream resource Tel: +33 1 44 37 14 50 requirements of traded commodities including Fax: +33 1 44 37 14 74 materials, land, energy and water. The report Email: [email protected] seeks to shed light on: Website: www.unep.org/resourcepanel }} the dramatic rise in international trade in Twitter: @UNEPIRP recent decades, with over a six-fold increase in value and more than doubling of its volume between 1980 and 2010; }} the indirect resources associated with trade, i.e. resources used in the production process but not physically included in the traded goods; }} the increasing dependency on world markets to supply the demand for resources, across all material categories with fossil fuels and metals accounting for the highest share; }} the changes that patterns of trade dependence has experienced with high- income countries remaining main recipients of resources via trade and emerging economies, such as China, becoming major importers; and }} the rapid increase in upstream requirements of traded commodities -in terms of materials, water, land and energy - the estimates of which range widely from 40 up to 400 per cent of traded materials.

ISBN: 978-92-807-3486-7 Job Number: DTI/1878/PA