0% found this document useful (0 votes)
78 views12 pages

Complexity and Diversity of Nexuses

Uploaded by

Valentina Monico
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
78 views12 pages

Complexity and Diversity of Nexuses

Uploaded by

Valentina Monico
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 12

Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Review

Complexity and diversity of nexuses: A review of the nexus approach in the


sustainability context
Ronald C. Estoque
Center for Biodiversity and Climate Change, Forestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8687, Japan

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• This review traces the origin/progress of


the nexus approach in the human-
environment realm.
• This approach is a tool for systems integra-
tion, stakeholder engagement and explor-
ing pathways.
• It emerged in 1982 with the proposed
two-node nexus (food-energy).
• It has since become more complex (more
nodes) and diverse (more distinct nex-
uses).
• More efforts are needed to harness the po-
tential of this approach for global sustain-
ability.

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Editor: Jay Gan Achieving global sustainability is a coupled human-environment system issue that requires resource planning and
management that goes beyond siloed thinking. As such, there has been a growing interest in nexus thinking as a
Keywords: way to address global sustainability challenges in an integrated manner. In general, the nexus approach serves as a
Coupled human-environment system tool for systems integration, a platform for stakeholder engagement, and a method for exploring development path-
Integrated approach
ways. This review traces the historical origin and progress of the nexus approach and examines the changes in the com-
Nexus thinking
Sustainable development goals
plexity and diversity of nexuses over time. Since its emergence in the early 1980s, the nexus approach has undergone
Synergy several phases of development, resulting in more complex and diverse nexuses, whose components can be resource
Trade-off sectors/systems and/or specific social-ecological issues. This progress is favorable for the sustainable development
agenda because the more components involved in a nexus, the greater the reality that can be potentially captured. Cur-
rently, however, there is still no consensus with regards to the key nexus components that could potentially cover all of
the sustainable development goals. The development of frameworks for implementing the nexus approach and the
identification of relevant indicators and target values to be used for assessing trade-offs and synergies are among
the current issues with regards to the use of the nexus approach in the sustainability context.

E-mail address: estoquerc21@affrc.go.jp.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158612
Received 30 May 2022; Received in revised form 1 September 2022; Accepted 4 September 2022
Available online 8 September 2022
0048-9697/© 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. The nexus approach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2. Emergence of the nexus approach in the human-environment realm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3. Structure of the nexus approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Key functions and potentials of the nexus approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Temporal trend and complexity of nexuses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Diversity of nexuses and the SDGs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3. Implications and challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4. Limitation and way forward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Summary and conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
CRediT authorship contribution statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Declaration of competing interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix A. Supplementary data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

1. Introduction Scott et al., 2015; Endo et al., 2017; Simpson and Jewitt, 2019). Some reviews
have focused on bibliometric trends, again mostly focusing on the water-
Global sustainability challenges, including food, water and energy inse- energy-food nexus (Albrecht et al., 2018; Newell et al., 2019; Itayi et al.,
curity (Hoff, 2011; WEF, 2011), biodiversity loss (Butchart et al., 2010; 2021; Proctor et al., 2021; Taguta et al., 2022). Other reviews have focused
WWF, 2020), rapid urbanization and its negative social-ecological impacts on the state of knowledge and future research directions about the nexus ap-
(Elmqvist et al., 2013; Estoque et al., 2021), increasing global ecological proach in relation to the global sustainability agenda (Boas et al., 2016; Liu
footprint (WWF, 2020), natural disasters (Ritchie and Roser, 2014) and et al., 2018; van Zanten and van Tulder, 2021).
poverty, inequality and unemployment (Blustein et al., 2020; Ravallion, However, a review on the complexity and diversity of nexuses is still lack-
2020), are increasingly pressing and deeply interconnected (Liu et al., ing. Hence, it is here that the novelty of this review comes in as it attempts
2018, 2021). The threat of climate change (IPCC, 2022), the unstable global to bridge this knowledge gap. In this review, complexity is measured accord-
geopolitical conditions (e.g., Russia-Ukraine war (Liadze et al., 2022)) and ing to the number of nexus nodes; i.e., more nodes means higher nexus
the social, economic and environmental impacts of the COVID-19 global complexity, and vice versa. On the other hand, diversity is measured based
pandemic (Mofijur et al., 2021) have compounded these challenges. If on the number of distinct nexuses; i.e., more distinct nexuses means higher
such challenges are not addressed, the situation will be worse in the years nexus diversity, and vice versa. More specifically, using a systematic review
to come as the world's population is projected to increase by about 20% approach, this review aims to examine the changes in the complexity and
from 2020 (7.8 billion) to 2050 (9.7 billion) (UN, 2019). diversity of nexuses over time and their implications to the global sustain-
In 2015, to address these global sustainability challenges and lay path- ability agenda. Examining how the complexity and diversity of nexuses
ways for global sustainable development, the United Nations adopted the have progressed over the years, especially in recent years, might provide
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which includes 17 Sustainable some insights into the future direction of the nexus approach and whether
Development Goals (SDGs) (https://sdgs.un.org/goals). Accordingly, this such a direction is consistent with or geared towards helping to achieve
Agenda is “a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity”. However, global sustainability.
operationalizing the SDGs on the ground is not straightforward because In addition, a combined historical and conceptual review was under-
there are critical issues that need to be overcome, including how to maxi- taken to trace the historical origin and development of the nexus approach
mize and minimize, respectively, the synergies and trade-offs between in the human-environment realm and identify its key functions and poten-
and among the goals (Bleischwitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018; Kroll et al., tials in the context of achieving global sustainability. For this, a timeline
2019; van Zanten and van Tulder, 2021). To overcome these issues and ad- was constructed to highlight important events and the emergence of key
dress the sustainability challenges, there is a need for a planning, manage- nexuses, and a framework was also developed to illustrate and discuss the
ment and assessment approach that is integrated and goes beyond structure and key ideas of the nexus approach.
traditional siloed thinking.
Today, the nexus approach is at the forefront of this issue. In the human- 2. The nexus approach
environment realm, nexus approach refers to the “examination and manage-
ment of interlinkages across sustainable development areas, particularly 2.1. Definitions
synergies and trade-offs, in an integrated manner to focus on system effi-
ciency, rather than improvements in isolated areas” (van Zanten and van According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary1, the term nexus comes
Tulder, 2021, p. 3705). Nexus approaches can “simultaneously examine in- from the Latin verb “nectere”, meaning “to bind”. Since the 17th century,
teractions among multiple sectors…, uncover synergies and detect trade- this term has been understood to mean “connection”, “connected series”
offs among sectors…, and have the potential to reduce negative surprises (as in “a nexus of relationships”) or “center” (as in “the trade nexus of the
and promote integrated planning, management and governance” (Liu region”). Oxford's Lexico2 defines it as “a connection or series of connec-
et al., 2018, p. 466). tions linking two or more things, e.g., the nexus between industry and po-
The literature on the nexus approach in the human-environment realm is litical power”, while the Etymology dictionary3 defines it as a “bond, link,
rich and rapidly growing. Reviews about this approach are also available and
come in various types. For example, some reviews have focused on the origin, 1
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nexus.
description, theory and practice of the nexus approach, with particular refer- 2
https://www.lexico.com/definition/nexus.
3
ence to the water-energy-food nexus (Allouche et al., 2015; Leck et al., 2015; https://www.etymonline.com/search?q=nexus.

2
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Table 1
Key concepts essential for understanding the nexus approach.
Key concept Definition/descriptiona Sample referencesb

Silo thinking Also called silo mentality or silo approach, silo thinking focuses on the individual management of Bleischwitz et al. (2018); Lazaro et al. (2021);
resource sectors or systems, as well as social-ecological issues. It is the opposite of nexus thinking. Phulkerd et al. (2022)
Nexus thinking Also called nexus approach or systems thinking, nexus thinking focuses on the interlinkages and Allouche et al. (2015); Albrecht et al. (2018);
management of resource sectors or systems, as well as social-ecological issues, in an integrated manner Simpson and Jewitt (2019)
with emphasis on detecting synergies and trade-offs.
Synergy An interaction between two or more management, development or policy interventions that results in Kroll et al. (2019); Pedercini et al. (2019); Zhang
an overall progress that is greater than the sum of the individual interventions' progress. et al. (2020); Kostetckaia and Hametner (2022)
Cascading effect The inevitable yet sometimes unforeseen chain of events that occurs when an event in one sector has an Liu et al. (2018); Hua et al. (2020); Kebede et al.
impact in other related sectors. A positive cascading effect can result in co-benefits, whereas a negative (2021)
cascading effect can result in unexpected consequences. This also applies to systems and
social-ecological issues.
Co-benefit and A co-benefit occurs when a management, development or policy intervention for a particular sector Liu et al. (2018); Zhou et al. (2018); Zhao et al.
unexpected results in positive impacts (also considered synergies) not only in the target sector but also in other (2022)
consequence related sectors. By contrast, an unexpected consequence occurs when such an intervention not only
results in a positive impact for the target sector but also unexpected side effects or negative impacts
(also considered trade-offs) in other related sectors. This also applies to systems and social-ecological
issues.
Trade-off A trade-off occurs when a management, development or policy intervention results in progress Kurian (2017); Kroll et al. (2019); Lee et al. (2020);
(positive impact) in one sector and regress (negative impact) in other related sectors. This also applies Kostetckaia and Hametner (2022)
to systems and social-ecological issues.
Development The particular direction in which interacting social, technological and environmental systems Allouche et al. (2015); Karlberg et al. (2015);
pathway co-evolve over time. Development pathways are also storylines and scenarios that project or simulate Bleischwitz et al. (2018); van Vuuren et al. (2019)
future resource demand and availability, as well as future social-ecological conditions, based on a set of
assumptions including prospective management, development and policy interventions.
a
These definitions/descriptions are based on the author's own understanding and interpretation of the concepts as used in the scientific literature, including the sample
references cited.
b
References for these concepts are not limited to those provided. Also, many of these cited sample references overlap in some of the key concepts listed.

[or] interdependence between members of a series or group” or as “means New Delhi, India, highlighting the emerging challenges brought about by
of communication”. the increasing demand for both food and energy (Sachs and Silk, 1990).
Many scholars have echoed such an understanding of the word, defin- Following the launch of the UNU's Food-Energy Nexus Programme, two
ing nexus as a term that “expresses the study of the interactions and connec- important international conferences were held. The first was the interna-
tions between two or more things, often termed dependencies or tional seminar on “Ecosystems, Food and Energy” held in September
interdependencies” (De Laurentiis et al., 2016, p. 3), or as an analytical ap- 1984 in Brasilia, Brazil, and the second was the international symposium
proach that “addresses the linkages between multiple distinct entities” (Liu on “Food-Energy Nexus and Ecosystem” held in February 1986 in New
et al., 2018, p. 466). In the context of natural resource management, and Delhi, India (Fig. 1). The overall purpose of these conferences was to high-
building upon the definition given by the United Nations University Insti- light the UNU's Food-Energy Nexus Programme and “to develop and illus-
tute for Integrated Management of Material Fluxes and of Resources trate further the interlinkages among food (agriculture, nutrition), energy
(https://flores.unu.edu/en/research/nexus), the Intergovernmental (biomass, post-harvest residues, animal traction, fuel, electricity) and eco-
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) de- systems (land, forests, water)” (Sachs and Silk, 1990, p. 17).
fines nexus as “a perspective which emphasizes the inter-relatedness and in- Meanwhile, the water-energy nexus that is so prevalent today might
terdependencies of ecosystem components and human uses, and their have originated in the mid-1990s and early 2000s (Scott et al., 2015), as ev-
dynamics and fluxes across spatial scales and between compartments…” idenced by some earlier works including those of Sant and Dixit (1996) and
(IPBES, 2019, p. 1047). Malik (2002) (Fig. 1). During this period, the introduction of “water” as an
Over the years, several important concepts have emerged and become important component of a human-environment nexus prompted the formu-
fundamental to the understanding of the nexus approach. These include, lation of other water-related nexuses, including the water-food-trade nexus
but are not limited to, silo thinking, nexus thinking, synergy, cascading ef- (McCalla, 1997), water-energy-environment nexus (Lofman et al., 2002)
fect, co-benefit, unexpected consequence, trade-off and development path- and energy-irrigation nexus (Shah et al., 2003). Although the food-water
way (Table 1). nexus did not receive particular attention during this period, the emergence
of the food-energy and water-energy nexuses indicates that the food, energy
2.2. Emergence of the nexus approach in the human-environment realm and water resource sectors were receiving attention decades back.
However, the three-way interaction between these nexus components
Some earlier reviews on the nexus approach attribute the first usage of that is known today as the water-energy-food nexus began to appear only
the term “nexus” in the human-environment realm to the year 1983 (Scott in the late 2000s (Siegfried et al., 2008) (Fig. 1). Accordingly, its emergence
et al., 2015; Endo et al., 2017; Liu et al., 2018), citing the book Food and was fueled by the 2007–2008 food and energy crisis, as well as the growing
Energy – Strategies for Sustainable Development by Sachs and Silk (1990). In issues of water scarcity and insecurity (Allouche, 2011; Allouche et al.,
this book, the authors acknowledge the Food-Energy Nexus Programme 2015; Boas et al., 2016). Over the same period, other nexuses were also pro-
of the United Nations University (UNU), which was launched in 1983 and posed, including the water-energy-food-environment interface (Hellegers
concluded in 1987 (Sachs and Silk, 1990). It is worth noting, however, et al., 2008) and the energy-poverty-climate nexus (Casillas and Kammen,
that this program was preceded by a project proposal on food-energy 2010). In 2014, the UNU also proposed the water-soil-waste nexus
nexus submitted to UNU a year earlier in 1982 (Sachs, 1982) (Fig. 1), (Hülsmann and Ardakanian, 2014). Nevertheless, despite the emergence
which aimed to serve as the entry point for local solutions to global prob- of other nexuses, since its introduction, the water-energy-food nexus has
lems and efficient resource use towards sustainable development (Sachs been an important research area in the fields of natural resource manage-
and Silk, 1990). This nexus idea was inspired by the message delivered ment and sustainability. Many scholars (Scott et al., 2015; Endo et al.,
by the Rector of the UNU at an intergovernmental meeting of development 2017; Simpson and Jewitt, 2019) associate the popularity of this nexus to
assistance coordinators in Asia and the Pacific, held in February 1981 in the World Economic Forum's publication titled Water Security: The Water-

3
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Fig. 1. Emergence of the nexus approach in the human-environment realm. The timeline shows some of the nexuses that have been proposed since 1982. The emergence of
the nexus approach in sustainability research can be characterized by four major waves (see text for explanations). Note that the exact time boundary between waves is
approximate, and that the focus nexus in each wave is not exclusive; i.e., there are also other nexuses. See Supplementary Table 1 for more examples of nexuses that have
been proposed by scholars.

Food-Energy-Climate Nexus (WEF, 2011), as well as the background paper Also, this historical timeline refutes the earlier claim that the term nexus
for the Bonn 2011 Conference: The Water, Energy and Food Security was “first conceived by the World Economic Forum (2011) to promote and
Nexus, titled Understanding the Nexus (Hoff, 2011). discuss the indivisible relationships between the multiple uses of resources”
In 2018, recognizing the importance of ecosystems towards achieve- (Tan et al., 2021, p. 6496). It also challenges the claim that the nexus ap-
ment of the SDGs, the European Commission's Joint Research Centre in proach “originated in reference to connections between climate, food, en-
partnership with the UNESCO-Intergovernmental Hydrological Programme ergy and water” with reference to the late 2000s period (Boas et al.,
launched a project called Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems Nexus: Analysing 2016, p. 452). As discussed above, the nexus approach has been considered
Solutions for Security Supply (Carmona-Moreno et al., 2021). This project by many scholars as an integrated approach to resource planning and man-
aims to promote “efficient implementation of sustainable growth measures agement since as early as the 1980s, a time when the issue about climate
by contributing to EU policy objectives and performing analyses of the resil- change was still not at the forefront.
ience of water, food, and energy security in societies” (Carmona-Moreno
et al., 2021, p. xi). The project's focus nexus is based on an earlier initiative 2.3. Structure of the nexus approach
adopted by the Water Convention in 2012 (Fig. 1), which was set out to as-
sess the water-food-energy-ecosystems nexus in transboundary river basins A nexus is composed of interconnected components that can be resource
(UNECE, 2015). Also in 2018, a major review on nexus approaches for sector-based or issue-based, or a combination of both. Resource sector-
global sustainable development was published (Liu et al., 2018). In 2019, based components such as water, food, energy, materials and land
the IPBES adopted a new work program that includes a thematic assess- (Bleischwitz et al., 2018) can also be viewed as systems (Liu et al., 2018).
ment of the interlinkages among biodiversity, water, food and health Issue-based nexus components can include any specific issues relevant to
(called nexus assessment); in 2021, the undertaking of this nexus assess- the discourse of integrated resource management in general, including eco-
ment was approved (https://ipbes.net/nexus). Other nexuses have also nomic growth, trade, CO2 emissions, ecological footprint and poverty
been proposed recently, including a resource sector-based nexus involving (Messerli et al., 2015; Nathaniel and Khan, 2020; Agboola et al., 2021).
land, water, food, energy and materials (Bleischwitz et al., 2018) and the A nexus can be composed of two or more interconnected components
water-food-energy-climate change-land nexus (Yue et al., 2021). (e.g., food-energy, food-energy-water). The number of components defines
Drawing from this historical timeline of nexus emergence and develop- how many nodes a nexus has. The example nexus presented in Fig. 2a
ment in the human-environment realm, this review identified four major is a resource sector- or system-based nexus composed of five components
waves, where one is more or less built from the earlier ones (Fig. 1). The or nodes (i.e., food-energy-water-health-ecosystems). As noted in
first wave refers to the period of the food-energy nexus; the second to the Section 2.2, the nexus approach in the human-environment realm started
period of the water-energy nexus; the third to the period of the water- with a two-node nexus, i.e., food-energy (Sachs, 1982), then it became
energy-food nexus; and the fourth to the period of the water-energy-food- more complex and diverse (more on this in Section 4).
others nexuses. This shows that nexuses in the human-environment realm Structurally, a nexus and its components are central to the nexus ap-
are becoming more complex, evolving from a simple two-node nexus proach (Fig. 2a, center). A nexus is developed based on different develop-
(e.g., food-energy nexus or water-energy nexus) to a more complex three- ment pathways formulated and designed to address various pressing and
node (e.g., water-energy-food nexus), four-node (e.g., water-energy-food- cross-cutting social-ecological issues, such as food, energy and water inse-
ecosystems nexus), five-node (e.g., land-water-food-energy-materials) or curity; climate change/variability; biodiversity loss; political conflict and
six-node (e.g., water-energy-food-economy-society-environment) nexus instability; poverty; and ecological footprint (Fig. 2a, left). Development
(Fig. 1; Supplementary Table 1). pathways represent plausible future scenarios that can be prepared for a

4
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

particular region considering local social and ecological conditions, ideally a feedback mechanism to prioritize the desirable pathway and/or to further
with the involvement of stakeholders coming from different sectors of improve the assumptions behind each development pathway in order to
society. strengthen synergies and reduce trade-offs. In this cyclical process, the
At the global level, the shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) frame- nexus approach serves as a diagnostic tool.
work is an example of a new-generation scenario framework that simulta- In a nutshell, a nexus is developed to support an integrated assessment
neously considers climate change mitigation and adaptation challenges, considering synergies and trade-offs, to promote and encourage stake-
as outlined in its five scenarios: SSP1, the sustainability scenario (low chal- holder engagements and to assess different development pathways or sce-
lenges; taking the green road); SSP2, the middle-of-the-road scenario (inter- narios anchored on various pressing and cross-cutting issues (Fig. 2a).
mediate challenges); SSP3, the regional rivalry scenario (high challenges; a Section 2.4 provides a detailed discussion of these key functions and poten-
rocky road); SSP4, the inequality scenario (adaptation challenges domi- tials of the nexus approach.
nate; a road divided); and SSP5, the fossil-fueled development scenario In general, nexus-based planning, management and assessment towards
(mitigation challenges dominate; taking the highway) (O'Neill et al., achieving global sustainability should be framed in the context of the sus-
2017; Estoque et al., 2019a). tainability nexus, which itself is rooted in the human-environment nexus,
Development pathways, including resource management, development forming a nested hierarchy of nexuses (Fig. 2b). The sustainability nexus
and policy interventions, are assessed in terms of the projected synergy and is composed of the three inter-connected pillars or dimensions of sustain-
trade-off between nexus components, as well as the projected overall out- ability, namely environmental, social and economic (Estoque and
come for each component (Fig. 2a, right). Such assessment can be used as Murayama, 2014a; Estoque, 2020), also known as the triple bottom line

Fig. 2. Conceptual structure of a nexus approach in the human-environment realm. (a) An example of a five-node nexus: food, energy, water, health and ecosystems. The
diagram presents the basic flow in the development and implementation of a nexus. Outcome refers to the development outcome after synergies and trade-offs have been
considered. (b) The human-environment nexus as a nested hierarchy, encompassing the sustainability nexus and the nexus of interest, and considering transboundary
interlinkages (geographical, political or administrative). (c) The human-environment nexus as implemented across spatial scales, from local to global.

5
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

(planet, people, profit) (Elkington, 1994). While the word nexus was not (Table 1) between and among management, development and policy inter-
explicitly used when sustainability was conceptualized back in the 17th ventions targeting resource sectors, systems and social-ecological issues
century (Grober, 2007), the connection between two components (Hoff, 2011; Boas et al., 2016; Bleischwitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018).
(i.e., forest resources and human consumption) was fundamental to the For example, in the context of the SDGs, addressing the problem of lack
said conceptualization of sustainability as it is understood today (Grober, of access to drinking water can help improve health conditions (van
2007; Estoque, 2020). Today, the 17 SDGs are at the core of the current Vuuren et al., 2022), and this can result in a synergy between SDG 6
global sustainable development agenda, whose achievement requires inte- (clean water and sanitation) and SDG 3 (good health and well-being). By
grated resource planning and management and a nexus thinking approach contrast, the transitioning from rainfed to irrigated agriculture for the pur-
(Bleischwitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018). pose of increasing land productivity can lead to increased demand for water
Sustainability is a coupled human and natural system issue (Liu et al., and carbon footprint (Liu et al., 2018), and this can result in a trade-off be-
2018). Hence, a nexus-based sustainability assessment is performed for a tween SDG 2 (zero hunger) and SDG 12 (responsible consumption and pro-
particular place, where such a place can be viewed as a coupled human duction) and/or SDG 13 (climate action). Furthermore, the nexus
and natural system (Liu et al., 2007, 2018) (or a coupled human- approach's idea of integration is not limited to cross-sectoral integration
environment system (Turner et al., 2003), or a social-ecological system (Fig. 2a) because it also considers transboundary interlinkages (geographi-
(Ostrom, 2009; Estoque and Murayama, 2014b)). To realize global sustain- cal, political or administrative) (Fig. 2b) and policy integration at different
ability, nexus-based planning, management and assessments at the local levels (from local to national and global) (Fig. 2c) (Liu et al., 2018).
level need to be linked with planning, management and assessments at As a platform for stakeholder engagement. The idea of integrated resource
the larger scale (Fig. 2c). This is because nexus at the local level may affect planning and management necessitates the involvement of stakeholders
various sectors at the national and global levels (Liu et al., 2018). For exam- across sectors, particularly in those sectors that are directly involved in
ple, peace-international relations-politics connections in some countries the nexus under consideration. In fact, stakeholder engagement is also not
(e.g., Russia and Ukraine) have important implications on food and energy a new idea and is not limited to the nexus approach. Today, in the broader
sectors worldwide (Liadze et al., 2022). context of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, stakeholder en-
gagement plays a critical role because this agenda requires a strong alliance
2.4. Key functions and potentials of the nexus approach between policy makers, experts and other stakeholders from different sec-
tors, i.e., across the science-policy-society interface. By definition, a stake-
As mentioned above (Section 2.3), the key functions and potentials of holder is “any individual or organization that may affect, or be affected
the nexus approach are centered on at least three aspects, i.e., the nexus ap- by a company's actions and decisions” (www.ungpreporting.org) or “a per-
proach as a tool for systems integration, as a platform for stakeholder en- son or an organization that has a legitimate interest in a project or entity, or
gagement and as a method for exploring development pathways. would be affected by a particular action or policy” (IPCC, 2007, p. 881).
As a tool for systems integration. The idea of integrated resource planning In integrated planning, management and assessment, it is important to
and/or management is not new. Such an approach to resource planning and recognize that no one has a monopoly on knowledge, expertise and experi-
management was introduced decades ago from the energy and water sec- ence, which means that there is a need to engage as many stakeholders as
tors. For example, in response to the energy and financial crisis in the possible. The nexus approach provides a platform for scientists and other
1970s and 1980s, the concept of integrated resource planning was devel- stakeholders to co-design, co-produce and co-implement nexus assess-
oped (York and Narum, 1996; Greacen et al., 2013). Integrated resource ments, including prospective policy interventions and development path-
planning is a “planning approach that has the potential to take a society- ways (Fig. 2a), where the expertise, experiences, perceptions and needs of
wide perspective, incorporate public participation in meaningful ways, all stakeholders should be considered (Howarth and Monasterolo, 2017;
and has a strong track record in creating plans that are low-cost, low risk, Hoolohan et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018; Yuan and Lo, 2022). In the context
and with outcomes that minimize environmental and social impacts” of sustainability, in general, stakeholders need to work together to identify
(Greacen et al., 2013, p. 2). This approach was conceptualized not only and realize concrete pathways for transformation.
for the integrated assessment of energy supply and demand, but also for As a method for exploring development pathways. The nexus approach also
the attainment of a variety of policy goals, including economic efficiency provides a platform for exploring different development pathways, includ-
and environmental protection (York and Narum, 1996). Today, many vari- ing prospective policy interventions (Fig. 2a). Development pathways are
ants of integrated planning and management concepts and approaches are scenarios that depict alternative futures (Costanza et al., 2015; Estoque
available, including integrated solid waste management, integrated natural et al., 2019b) (see also Table 1). The shared socioeconomic pathways are
resources management, integrated watershed management, integrated for- examples of development pathways at the global level that are also relevant
est management and integrated pest management, to name a few. to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Szetey et al., 2021; van
Integrated water resources management (IWRM) is one, if not the most, Vuuren et al., 2022). In fact, in the broader sense, the 17 SDGs are them-
popular integrated management approach. It is believed that the conceptu- selves development pathways. However, for each of these goals and their
alization of IWRM started in the 1930s (Mukhtarov, 2008). However, it was respective targets to be achieved, more specific pathways that include spe-
not until the 1990s, following the 1992 Dublin Conference on Water and cific prospective policy and development interventions need to be formu-
Environment and the 1992 United Nations Rio Summit on Environment lated, designed and evaluated considering synergies, trade-offs and their
and Development, that it attracted particular attention and gained popular- overall outcomes (Fig. 2a).
ity (Biswas, 2008; Mukhtarov, 2008; Agarwal et al., 2000). By the 1990s, Among scholars, there is a growing interest in pathways that can link
“water problems had become multi-dimensional, multi-sectoral and biodiversity and human health (Marselle et al., 2021). At the same time,
multi-regional, and were enmeshed with multi-interests, multi-agendas the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change advocates for climate-
and multi-causes, which could be resolved only through an appropriate resilient development pathways that can consolidate climate actions
multi-disciplinary, multi-institutional and multi-stakeholders coordina- (e.g., net zero carbon emissions initiatives) and development initiatives to-
tion” (Biswas, 2008, p. 7). By definition, IWRM is “a process which pro- wards long-term sustainable development (Werners et al., 2021; IPCC,
motes the co-ordinated development and management of water, land and 2022). Today, the formulation, design and evaluation of development path-
related resources, in order to maximize the resultant economic and social ways (van Vuuren et al., 2019), as well as the development and testing of
welfare in an equitable manner without compromising the sustainability methodologies for integration (Liu et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2020) and the
of vital ecosystems” (Agarwal et al., 2000, p. 22). identification and assessment of synergies and trade-offs (Kroll et al.,
The nexus approach is built on the premise of integrated resource plan- 2019; Pedercini et al., 2019; Lee et al., 2020; Zhang et al., 2020;
ning and management. Its goal is to promote integrated planning, manage- Kostetckaia and Hametner, 2022), are among the current challenges, not
ment and governance by strengthening synergies and reducing trade-offs only in nexus research, but also in sustainability research in general.

6
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Overall, a development pathway should be able to capture or be based 4. Results and discussion
on the cross-cutting issues confronting the integrity and sustainable devel-
opment of a coupled human-environment system across spatial scales, 4.1. Temporal trend and complexity of nexuses
such as those mentioned in Fig. 2a.
Of the total number of article publications reviewed (304), 99% were
published during the third and fourth waves. Of this number, 82% were
3. Methods
published during the fourth wave (Fig. 3a). There are three plausible rea-
sons for this large proportion of article publications in recent years. First,
A systematic review was performed to elucidate the progress of nexus
the search procedure used in this review (Section 3) strictly narrowed
research in the sustainability realm and to examine changes in the complex-
down the potential publications only to those studies (articles) that were ex-
ity and diversity of nexuses over time. Here, more nodes means higher com-
plicitly conducted in the context of sustainability, which is the focus of this
plexity, and more distinct nexuses means higher diversity. For a nexus to be
review. Although, sustainability, as it is understood today, was conceptual-
considered distinct, it must be different from the other nexuses in terms of
ized centuries back (Estoque, 2020), and although the sustainable develop-
components. Two or more nexuses whose components are the same but
ment concept was made popular in the late 20th century with the
given in a different order were considered to be one distinct nexus
publication of the Brundtland Report (Our Common Future) in 1987
(e.g., water-energy-food and energy-food-water were considered as one
(WCED, 1987), the connection of these concepts with the nexus approach
nexus). In counting distinct nexuses over a particular year, nexuses with
in its modern sense was relatively less explicit during the first and second
the same components were considered as one, regardless of whether the
waves.
same nexus was also present in other years (i.e., distinct for a particular
Second, although the nexus approach in the human-environment realm
year). The same logic was applied when counting distinct nexuses over a
was introduced in the early 1980s, as the timeline shows (Fig. 1), it only
particular period (i.e., distinct for a particular period).
started to gain traction and interest among scholars in the late 2000s.
The systematic review technique used consisted of three main steps
This is when the water-energy-food nexus was introduced in 2008
(searching, screening, and appraisal and synthesis) and was informed by
(Siegfried et al., 2008) and later gained popularity through the 2011
the RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Synthesis (ROSES) proto-
World Economic Forum (WEF, 2011) and the Bonn 2011 Conference
col (Haddaway et al., 2018; Estoque et al., 2019c). For searching and
(Hoff, 2011).
screening, the Web of Science Core Collection was used as the source data-
Third, the adoption of the SDGs in 2015 by the United Nations, goals
base. The search was performed using the following keywords: “nexus”
that are set to be achieved by 2030, has brought about many important re-
(under Title) AND “sustainable” (under Topic) AND “sustainability”
search challenges, particularly on the issue of integrated resource manage-
(under Topic). The search period was set to “January 1, 1983 – December
ment (Bleischwitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2018). Arguably, such challenges
31, 2021”, considering the emergence of the nexus approach in the
are a major driving force behind the rapid growth of the scientific literature
human-environment realm in 1982 via a project proposal on the food-
on the nexus approach in the sustainability realm in recent years (Fig. 3a).
energy nexus (see Section 2.2). The publication type and language were
The review also revealed that nexuses have become more complex over
set to “Article” and “English”, respectively. The search process resulted in
the years, as indicated by the increase in the number of nexus nodes. For ex-
a total of 320 articles, which were screened individually. All of the articles
ample, the average number of nodes during the fourth wave (2.83) was sig-
that did not use, present or discuss any particular nexus were excluded. This
nificantly higher (p < 0.0001) than during the third wave (2.39) (Fig. 3b).
screening process narrowed the number of articles down to 304.
During the third wave, the proportion of two-node nexus studies was
For appraisal and synthesis, the key nexus that each article used, pre-
more than twice that of three-node nexus studies (Fig. 3c). During the
sented or discussed was recorded and reviewed. Review results were sum-
fourth wave, although the proportion of four-node nexus studies greatly in-
marized and synthesized in terms of
creased, the proportions of two- and three-node nexus studies also greatly
(i) number of article publications over time. This was to clarify the tempo- increased and so remained relatively higher. Of the two-node nexus studies,
ral trend of sustainability studies that have utilized the nexus ap- 23% and 24% involved the water-energy nexus during the third and fourth
proach; waves, respectively (Fig. 3d). Although these values seem low, the water-
(ii) percentage of article publications by number of nexus nodes. This was energy nexus remained dominant among the two-node nexus studies (Sup-
to gain some understanding of the distribution of studies that have plementary Table 1). On the other hand, 65% and 62% of the three-node
used simple and more complex nexuses; nexus studies involved the water-energy-food nexus during the third and
(iii) percentage share of studies that utilized the water-energy nexus and fourth waves, respectively, indicating that this nexus remained dominant
the water-energy-food nexus to the total number of studies that used among three-node nexus studies.
two-node and three-node nexuses, respectively. This was to draw In addition to the observed increase in the proportion of four-node
some inferences on the potential influence of the water-energy nexus (e.g., water-food-energy-ecology (Zhang et al., 2021)) nexus studies in gen-
and the water-energy-food nexus in the field; eral during the fourth wave, the review also revealed that five-node
(iv) percentage of studies that utilized nexuses with four nodes where the (e.g., water-energy-food-land use-climate (Laspidou et al., 2020)) and six-
water, energy and food resource sectors were also present. An inven- node (e.g., water-energy-food-economy-society-environment (Chai et al.,
tory list of resource sectors, systems and issues that have been used 2020)) nexus studies also started to appear (Fig. 3c; Supplementary
by scholars in combination with water, energy and food was also cre- Table 1). Over the 2008–2021 period covering the third and fourth
ated; and waves, there were 43 (14%) studies that utilized, presented or discussed a
(v) average number of nexus nodes and number of distinct nexuses. This nexus with four or more nodes (Supplementary Fig. 1a). Of these studies,
was to gain some insight into the complexity and diversity of nexuses, more than half (58%) used the water-energy-food nexus in combination
respectively, over time. with other nexus components (resource sectors, systems or issues). These
other components were climate (Laspidou et al., 2020; Yue et al., 2021), en-
vironment (Chai et al., 2020; Yue and Guo, 2021), land (Lazaro et al., 2021;
The potential contributions of the identified nexuses towards the SDGs Yue et al., 2021), ecosystem (including ecology and biodiversity) (Malagó
were also examined. More specifically, each nexus was evaluated to deter- et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2021), waste (including material flow) (Garcia
mine which SDGs the nexus and its components have a direct relationship et al., 2019; Gu et al., 2019), health (Slorach et al., 2020; Hirwa et al.,
with. The overall purpose of this section of the review synthesis was to iden- 2021), carbon (including CO2, carbon emission) (Gu et al., 2019; Xu
tify any gaps and possible ways forward in nexus research and development et al., 2020), land use (Laspidou et al., 2020) and education (Kilkils and
in the context of sustainability. Kilkis, 2017) (Supplementary Fig. 1b; Supplementary Table 1).

7
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Fig. 3. Breakdown of the nexus studies considered in this review (2008–2021). (a) Number of article publications per year after screening. (b) Average number of nexus nodes
during the third and fourth waves. (c) Percentage of publications by number of nodes. (d) Percentage share of the water-energy nexus and the water-energy-food nexus to the
total number of publications with two and three nexus nodes, respectively. Note that only the third and fourth waves are highlighted here because there were few publications
during the first and second waves (see Supplementary Table 1).

It can be noted that most of these additional nexus components are also (Supplementary Fig. 2a). Overall, during the third wave, there were 35 dis-
supported by other proposals and initiatives. For example, although the tinct nexuses, and during the fourth wave, there were 143 (Supplementary
2011 World Economic Forum (WEF, 2011) is regarded as having been an Fig. 2b). This is a more than four-fold increase in the diversity of nexuses
important influence on the popularity of the water-energy-food nexus between the two periods. This trend is also favorable for the sustainable de-
(Allouche et al., 2015; Albrecht et al., 2018; Simpson and Jewitt, 2019), cli- velopment agenda because the SDGs comprise a diverse range of targets
mate was originally one of the nexus components proposed by the forum and indicators.
(i.e., water-food-energy-climate nexus) (WEF, 2011). A few years ago, Regarding the components of a nexus, while some scholars advocate for
land and materials were also suggested by scholars as important additions the use of resource sectors (e.g., water, food, energy, materials and land)
to the water, energy and food resource sectors (Bleischwitz et al., 2018). (Bleischwitz et al., 2018), this review found that nexus components are
And while UNU earlier focused on a water-soil-waste nexus, UNU's recent not limited to resource sectors and also include specific issues
Resource Nexus initiative goes beyond these three components and in- (e.g., economic growth, trade, CO2 emissions, ecological footprint and pov-
cludes all relevant environmental resources, including energy and other erty) (Messerli et al., 2015; Nathaniel and Khan, 2020; Agboola et al., 2021)
geo-resources as well as biodiversity (https://flores.unu.edu/en/research/ (Fig. 4; Supplementary Table 1). While the focus nexuses during the first
nexus). In their nexus assessment projects, the Water Convention, wave (food-energy) and second wave (water-energy) can be viewed as re-
European Commission and UNESCO have included ecosystems as a nexus source sector- or system-based nexuses (Fig. 1), the nexuses during the
component in addition to the water, energy and food resource sectors third and fourth waves were, to a certain extent, based on mixed nexus
(UNECE, 2015; Carmona-Moreno et al., 2021). Finally, as already men- components, i.e., included various issues (Fig. 1; Supplementary Table 1).
tioned in Section 2.2, in one of the current initiatives of the IPBES, called The components of the water-energy-food nexus are directly related to
nexus assessment, health has been identified as an important nexus compo- SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy)
nent, together with biodiversity, water and food (https://ipbes.net/nexus). and SDG 2 (zero hunger), and are indirectly related to the rest of the
With the current trend, it is expected that in the coming years other key- SDGs (Liu et al., 2018). Plotting the identified “water-energy-food”-based
words (i.e., resource sectors, systems, or issues) will be linked with the distinct nexuses with ≥4 nodes against the SDGs revealed a distinct pattern
water-energy-food nexus. of concentrated focus (Fig. 4). For example, the components added to the
water-energy-food nexus are mostly directly related to SDG 12 (responsible
4.2. Diversity of nexuses and the SDGs consumption and production) (e.g., nos. 6 (Gu et al., 2019) and 9 (Malan,
2021) in Fig. 4), SDG 13 (climate action) (e.g., nos. 4 (Yue et al., 2021)
For the entire 2008–2021 period, the review revealed a total of 174 dis- and 13 (Laso et al., 2018)), and SDG 15 (life on land) (e.g., nos. 5
tinct nexuses (Supplementary Fig. 2a; Supplementary Table 1). The review (Laspidou et al., 2020) and 8 (Tudose et al., 2021)), with some related to
also revealed that the diversity of nexuses has increased over time, particu- SDG 3 (good health and well-being) (e.g., nos. 3 (Mabhaudhi et al., 2021)
larly in recent years. For example, in 2015, there were only 8 distinct nex- and 12 (Slorach et al., 2020)) and SDG 14 (life below water) (e.g., nos. 2
uses, but this number increased to 24 in 2019 and to 86 in 2021 (Hirwa et al., 2021) and 7 (Zhang et al., 2021)) (Fig. 4; Supplementary

8
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Fig. 4. Examples of nexuses in the human-environment realm and their direct relationships to the SDGs (indicated by check marks). The numbers on the left are linked to
Supplementary Table 1 for the source studies. SDG icons credit: www.un.org.

Table 1). This shows that to a large extent the identified “water-energy- issues. This suggests that nexuses that are already available, and that can
food”-based distinct nexuses also focus more on resource sectors or systems, help address specific issues related to the SDGs, e.g., SDG 1 (no poverty)
like the water-energy-food nexus itself. (e.g., nos. 20 (Messerli et al., 2015) and 27 (Shahid et al., 2021) in
In contrast, plotting some of the identified non-“water-energy-food”- Fig. 4), SDG 4 (quality education) (e.g., nos. 14 (Kilkils and Kilkis, 2017)
based distinct nexuses against the SDGs revealed a much wider coverage and 21 (Burbridge and Morrison, 2021)), SDG 10 (reduced inequalities)
due to the diversity of these nexuses (Fig. 4). These additional nexus com- (e.g., nos. 29 (Azunre et al., 2021) and 30 (Gashu and Aminu, 2019))
ponents are to a large extent a mix of resource sectors, systems and specific and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) (e.g., nos. 21

9
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

(Burbridge and Morrison, 2021) and 23 (Fisher et al., 2021)), are not nec- 4.4. Limitation and way forward
essarily anchored on the water-energy-food nexus (Fig. 4; Supplementary
Table 1). That said, more efforts on nexus development are needed so The limitation of this review is the potential non-inclusion of other stud-
that specific issues related to the SDGs that remain less covered, e.g., SDG ies that also focused on the nexus approach due to the bibliometric search
5 (gender equality) (e.g., no. 29 (Azunre et al., 2021)), can be afforded method employed (keywords used, e.g., “nexus” under title) and the data-
greater attention. In fact, the present review found that while peace has base used (Web of Science Core Collection). Hence, should there be a
been used as a nexus component (e.g., no. 23 (Fisher et al., 2021)), gender, need to expand this review in the near future, one way would be to include
equality, justice and partnerships, which are all part of the SDGs, have not other bibliometric databases (e.g., Scopus and Google Scholar (Albrecht
been explicitly considered (Fig. 4; Supplementary Table 1). et al., 2018; Itayi et al., 2021)) and use other keywords (e.g., integrated, in-
tegration, etc.), or at least assign “nexus” under topic. Nevertheless, Web of
4.3. Implications and challenges Science is a large database of articles, including those in the social and en-
vironmental sciences. Other scholarly works have demonstrated that Web
Overall, the nexus approach in the human-environment realm has over of Science alone can be used as a source for major systematic reviews
the years undergone several phases of development. As a result, nexuses (Runting et al., 2017; Newell et al., 2019). Furthermore, the final total num-
have become more intricate or complex and diverse, evolving from a simple ber of articles considered (304) was large enough for the purpose of this re-
two-node nexus (food-energy nexus) to more complex nexuses with more view and higher than those of other major systematic reviews (Runting
than four nodes or components. This progress is favorable for the sustain- et al., 2017; Albrecht et al., 2018; Itayi et al., 2021; Taguta et al., 2022).
able development agenda because the more components involved in a
nexus, the greater the reality that can be potentially captured in the assess- 5. Summary and conclusions
ment. Such progress has also seen the inclusion or use of specific social-
ecological issues as nexus components aside from the traditional resource The nexus approach in the human-environment realm emerged in the
sector/system-based components. This shift in the nexus conceptualization early 1980s and is an integrated assessment, planning and management ap-
and formulation in terms of components also offers an important advantage proach that captures interlinkages across sustainable development areas. In
with respect to the SDGs because the SDGs themselves are framed based on general, the nexus approach serves as (i) a tool for systems integration,
various pressing social and ecological issues. where synergies and trade-offs are considered when assessing development
This evolution of ideas towards the advancement of the nexus approach in pathways; (ii) a platform for stakeholder engagement, providing an impor-
the human-environment realm, i.e., being an integrated approach, might tant opportunity for scientists and other stakeholders to co-design, co-
have been due to several key factors. First, in recent decades, increasing atten- produce and co-implement nexus assessments, including prospective policy
tion has been paid to trade-offs, synergies, and cascading effects (or impact interventions and development pathways; and (iii) a method for exploring de-
chains) in the discourse of global environmental change (including climate velopment pathways that can capture cross-cutting issues confronting the in-
change) and sustainability issues, and that integrated planning, management tegrity and sustainable development of a human-environment system. Since
and impact assessment is seen as a way forward. Second, the emphasis on its emergence, the nexus approach has undergone several phases of develop-
multi/interdisciplinary research, especially in the human-environment ment, resulting in more intricate or complex and diverse nexuses, whose com-
realm has become stronger. Third, with the advances in information and com- ponents can be resource sectors/systems and/or specific social-ecological
puting technology, modeling approaches have also become more advanced, issues. This trend is favorable for the sustainable development agenda be-
enabling more sophisticated integrated impact assessments. cause the more components involved in a nexus, the greater the reality that
However, despite this progress in the development of the nexus ap- can be potentially captured. However, currently, there is still no consensus
proach, currently there is still no consensus with regards to the key nexus with regards to the key nexus components that could potentially cover all
components that could potentially cover all of the SDGs. In general, there of the SDGs. The development of frameworks for implementing the nexus ap-
is no prescribed guideline with regards to the selection of nexus compo- proach and the identification of relevant indicators and target values to be
nents, meaning nexus components are usually selected based on the goal used for assessing trade-offs and synergies are among the current issues
of the assessment at hand. Therefore, determination of the key nexus com- with regards to the use of the nexus approach in the sustainability context.
ponents for, and in the context of, the global sustainability agenda is an im-
portant task, although it is certainly not an easy nor straightforward one. CRediT authorship contribution statement
With regards to nexus components, as mentioned above (Sections 2.2
and 4.1), in lieu of, or in addition to, water, food and energy, several RCE conceptualized and wrote this review article.
nexus components are currently being given particular attention, including
“health” and “biodiversity” (biodiversity-water-food-health nexus by the Data availability
IPBES (https://ipbes.net/nexus)), “ecosystems” (water-energy-food-eco-
systems nexus by the European Commission and UNESCO (Carmona- All data that support the findings of this study are included within the
Moreno et al., 2021)), “land” and “materials” (water-energy-food- article (and any supplementary files).
materials-land nexus by some scholars (Bleischwitz et al., 2018)), and
“other resources” and “biodiversity” (water-soil-waste-other resources- Declaration of competing interest
biodiversity by the UNU (https://flores.unu.edu/en/research/nexus)) (see
Fig. 4 and Supplementary Table 1 for more examples of nexuses). With The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests
regards to the operationalization of the nexus approach in the context of or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work re-
the global sustainability agenda, in a previous review, a proposal was ported in this paper.
made to first consider a set of primary nexus components (e.g., food,
water and energy) and then identify which SDGs can be achieved directly
(e.g., SDGs 2, 6 and 7, respectively) or indirectly (e.g., the rest of the Acknowledgements
SDGs) (Liu et al., 2018). Among the current challenges with regards to the
use of the nexus approach in general are the development of modeling/ This work was supported by the Japan Society for the Promotion of
simulation frameworks for implementing the nexus approach and the Science (JSPS) through its Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (KAKENHI)
identification of the relevant indicators and target values to be used for Program (20K13262 and 22K01038, Principal Investigator: Ronald C.
assessing trade-offs and synergies (Bleischwitz et al., 2018; Liu et al., Estoque). Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations
2018; van Vuuren et al., 2022). expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily

10
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

reflect the views of his institution and the research funder. The author also Gu, Y., et al., 2019. Quantification of interlinked environmental footprints on a sustainable
university campus: a nexus analysis perspective. Appl. Energy 246, 65–76.
thanks the three anonymous reviewers for their constructive and insightful Haddaway, N.R., Macura, B., Whaley, P., Pullin, A.S., 2018. ROSES reporting standards for
comments and suggestions. systematic evidence syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of
the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps. Environ.
Evid. 7, 1–8.
Appendix A. Supplementary data Hellegers, P., Zilberman, D., Steduto, P., McCornick, P., 2008. Interactions between water,
energy, food and environment: evolving perspectives and policy issues. Water Policy
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. 10, 1–10.
Hirwa, H., et al., 2021. Insights on water and climate change in the greater horn of Africa:
org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158612.
connecting virtual water and water-energy-food-biodiversity-health nexus. Sustainability
13, 6483.
References Hoff, H., 2011. Understanding the Nexus. Background Paper for the Bonn2011 Nexus Confer-
ence: The Water, Energy and Food Security Nexus. Stockholm Environment Institute,
Stockholm, Sweden.
Agarwal, A., et al., 2000. Integrated Water Resources Management. Environmental Science Hoolohan, C., et al., 2018. Engaging stakeholders in research to address water–energy–food
and Engineering. Global Water Partnership, Stockholm, Sweden. (WEF) nexus challenges. Sustain. Sci. 13, 1415–1426.
Agboola, M.O., Bekun, F.V., Joshua, U., 2021. Pathway to environmental sustainability: nexus Howarth, C., Monasterolo, I., 2017. Opportunities for knowledge co-production across the
between economic growth, energy consumption, CO2 emission, oil rent and total natural energy-food-water nexus: making interdisciplinary approaches work for better climate
resources rent in Saudi Arabia. Resour. Policy 74, 102380. decision making. Environ. Sci. Policy 75, 103–110.
Albrecht, T.R., Crootof, A., Scott, C.A., 2018. The water-energy-food nexus: a systematic re- Hua, T., Zhao, W., Wang, S., Fu, B., Pereira, P., 2020. Identifying priority biophysical indica-
view of methods for nexus assessment. Environ. Res. Lett. 13, 043002. tors for promoting food-energy-water nexus within planetary boundaries. Resour.
Allouche, J., 2011. The sustainability and resilience of global water and food systems: political Conserv. Recycl. 163, 105102.
analysis of the interplay between security, resource scarcity, political systems and global Hülsmann, S., Ardakanian, R., 2014. White Book on Advancing a Nexus Approach to the Sus-
trade. Food Policy 36, S3–S8. tainable Management of Water, Soil and Waste. UNU-FLORES, Dresden, Germany.
Allouche, J., Middleton, C., Gyawali, D., 2015. Technical veil, hidden politics: interrogating IPBES, 2019. In: Brondizio, E.S., Settele, J., Díaz, S., Ngo, H.T. (Eds.), Glossary. in Global As-
the power linkages behind the nexus. Water Altern. 8, 610–626. sessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental
Azunre, G.A., Amponsah, O., Takyi, S.A., Mensah, H., 2021. Informality-sustainable city Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. IPBES secretariat,
nexus: the place of informality in advancing sustainable ghanaian cities. Sustain. Cities Bonn, Germany, pp. 1031–1064.
Soc. 67, 102707. IPCC, 2007. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Contribution of
Biswas, A.K., 2008. Integrated water resources management: is it working? Int. J. Water Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-
Resour. Dev. 24, 5–22. mate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Bleischwitz, R., et al., 2018. Resource nexus perspectives towards the United Nations sustain- IPCC, 2022. In: Pörtner, H.-O., et al. (Eds.), Summary for Policymakers. in Climate Change
able development goals. Nat. Sustain. 1, 737–743. 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability (Contribution of Working Group II to the
Blustein, D.L., et al., 2020. Unemployment in the time of COVID-19: a research agenda. Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
J. Vocat. Behav. 119, 103436. University Press In Press.
Boas, I., Biermann, F., Kanie, N., 2016. Cross-sectoral strategies in global sustainability gover- Itayi, C.L., Mohan, G., Saito, O., 2021. Understanding the conceptual frameworks and
nance: towards a nexus approach. Int. Environ. Agreements Polit. Law Econ. 16, 449–464. methods of the food-energy-water nexus at the household level for development-
Burbridge, M., Morrison, G.M., 2021. A systematic literature review of partnership develop- oriented policy support: a systematic review. Environ. Res. Lett. 16, 033006.
ment at the university–industry–government nexus. Sustainability 13, 13780. Karlberg, L., et al., 2015. Tackling complexity: understanding the food-energy-environment
Butchart, S.H.M., et al., 2010. Global biodiversity: indicators of recent declines. Science 328, nexus in Ethiopia’s lake TANA sub-basin. Water Altern. 8, 710–734.
1164–1168. Kebede, A.S., Nicholls, R.J., Clarke, D., Savin, C., Harrison, P.A., 2021. Integrated assessment
Carmona-Moreno, C., et al. (Eds.), 2021. Implementing the Water– Energy–Food–Ecosystems of the food-water-land-ecosystems nexus in Europe: implications for sustainability. Sci.
Nexus and Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. UNESCO, European Union and Total Environ. 768, 144461.
IWA Publishing. Kilkils, S., Kilkis, B., 2017. Integrated circular economy and education model to address as-
Casillas, C.E., Kammen, D.M., 2010. The energy-poverty-climate nexus. Science 330, pects of an energy-water-food nexus in a dairy facility and local contexts. J. Clean.
1181–1182. Prod. 167, 1084–1098.
Chai, J., Shi, H., Lu, Q., Hu, Y., 2020. Quantifying and predicting the water-energy-food- Kostetckaia, M., Hametner, M., 2022. How sustainable development goals interlinkages influ-
economy-society-environment nexus based on bayesian networks - a case study of ence European Union countries’ progress towards the 2030 agenda. Sustain. Dev., 1–11
China. J. Clean. Prod. 256, 120266. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.2290.
Costanza, R., et al., 2015. Scenarios for Australia in 2050: a synthesis and proposed survey. Kroll, C., Warchold, A., Pradhan, P., 2019. Sustainable development goals (SDGs): are we suc-
J. Futur. Stud. 19, 49–76. cessful in turning trade-offs into synergies? Palgrave Commun. 5, 140.
De Laurentiis, V., Hunt, D.V.L., Rogers, C.D.F., 2016. Overcoming food security challenges Kurian, M., 2017. The water-energy-food nexus: trade-offs, thresholds and transdisciplinary
within an energy/water/food nexus (EWFN) approach. Sustainability 8, 95. approaches to sustainable development. Environ. Sci. Policy 68, 97–106.
Elkington, J., 1994. Towards the sustainable corporation: win-win-win business strategies for Laso, J., et al., 2018. Combined application of life cycle assessment and linear programming to
sustainable development. Calif. Manag. Rev. 36, 90–100. evaluate food waste-to-food strategies: seeking for answers in the nexus approach. Waste
Elmqvist, T., et al. (Eds.), 2013. Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Chal- Manag. 80, 186–197.
lenges and Opportunities. Springer, Dordrecht. Laspidou, C.S., Mellios, N.K., Spyropoulou, A.E., Kofinas, D.T., Papadopoulou, M.P., 2020.
Endo, A., Tsurita, I., Burnett, K., Orencio, P.M., 2017. A review of the current state of research Systems thinking on the resource nexus: modeling and visualisation tools to identify crit-
on the water, energy, and food nexus. J. Hydrol. Reg. Stud. 11, 20–30. ical interlinkages for resilient and sustainable societies and institutions. Sci. Total Envi-
Estoque, R.C., Murayama, Y., 2014a. Measuring sustainability based upon various perspec- ron. 717, 137264.
tives: a case study of a hill station in Southeast Asia. Ambio 43, 943–956. Lazaro, L.L.B., Giatti, L.L., Bermann, C., Giarolla, A., Ometto, J., 2021. Policy and governance
Estoque, R.C., Murayama, Y., 2014b. Social-ecological status index: a preliminary study of its dynamics in the water-energy-food-land nexus of biofuels: proposing a qualitative analy-
structural composition and application. Ecol. Indic. 43, 183–194. sis model. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 149, 111384.
Estoque, R.C., et al., 2019a. The future of Southeast Asia’s forests. Nat. Commun. 10, 1829. Leck, H., Conway, D., Bradshaw, M., Rees, J., 2015. Tracing the water-energy-food nexus: de-
Estoque, R.C., et al., 2019b. Scenario-based land abandonment projections: method, applica- scription, theory and practice. Geogr. Compass 9, 445–460.
tion and implications. Sci. Total Environ. 692, 903–916. Lee, S.H., Assi, A.T., Daher, B., Mengoub, F.E., Mohtar, R.H., 2020. A water-energy-food nexus
Estoque, R.C., et al., 2019c. A review of quality of life (QOL) assessments and indicators: to- approach for conducting trade-off analysis: Morocco’s phosphate industry in the
wards a “QOL-climate” assessment framework. Ambio 48, 619–638. Khouribga region. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 24, 4727–4741.
Estoque, R.C., 2020. A review of the sustainability concept and the state of SDG monitoring Liadze, I., Macchiarelli, C., Mortimer-Lee, P., Juanino, P.S., 2022. The Economic Costs of the
using remote sensing. Remote Sens. 12, 1770. Russia–Ukraine Conflict. National Institute of Economic and Social Research, London.
Estoque, R.C., Ooba, M., Togawa, T., Hijioka, Y., Murayama, Y., 2021. Monitoring global land- Liu, J., et al., 2007. Coupled human and natural systems. Ambio 36, 639–649.
use efficiency in the context of the UN 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Habitat Liu, J., et al., 2018. Nexus approaches to global sustainable development. Nat. Sustain. 1,
Int. 115, 102403. 466–476.
Fisher, J., et al., 2021. Four propositions on integrated sustainability: toward a theoretical Liu, J., et al., 2021. Coupled human and natural systems: the evolution and applications of an
framework to understand the environment, peace, and sustainability nexus. Sustain. integrated framework. Ambio 50, 1778–1783.
Sci. 16, 1125–1145. Lofman, D., Petersen, M., Bower, A., 2002. Water, energy and environment nexus: the Califor-
Garcia, D.J., Lovett, B.M., You, F., 2019. Considering agricultural wastes and ecosystem ser- nia experience. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 18, 73–85.
vices in food-energy-water-waste nexus system design. J. Clean. Prod. 228, 941–955. Mabhaudhi, T., et al., 2021. Assessing progress towards sustainable development goals
Gashu, K., Aminu, O., 2019. Participatory forest management and smallholder farmers’ liveli- through nexus planning. Water 13, 1321.
hoods improvement nexus in Northwest Ethiopia. J. Sustain. For. 38, 413–426. Malagó, A., et al., 2021. An analytical framework to assess SDG targets within the context of
Greacen, C., Greacen, C., von Hippel, D., Bill, D., 2013. An Introduction to Integrated Re- WEFE nexus in the Mediterranean region. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 164, 105205.
sources Planning. International Rivers, California, USA. Malan, N., 2021. Steering the nexus: iZindaba zokudla and governing for sustainability. Front.
Grober, U., 2007. Deep Roots: A Conceptual History of ‘Sustainable Development’ Sustain. Food Syst. 5, 705045.
(Nachhaltigkeit). WZB Discussion Paper, No. P 2007-002. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin Malik, R.P.S., 2002. Water-energy nexus in resource-poor economies: the Indian experience.
für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 18, 47–58.

11
R.C. Estoque Science of the Total Environment 854 (2023) 158612

Marselle, M.R., et al., 2021. Pathways linking biodiversity to human health: a conceptual Szetey, K., et al., 2021. Co-creating local socioeconomic pathways for achieving the sustain-
framework. Environ. Int. 150, 106420. able development goals. Sustain. Sci. 16, 1251–1268.
McCalla, A., 1997. The Water, Food, and Trade Nexus. Paper delivered at MENA-MED Confer- Taguta, C., Senzanje, A., Kiala, Z., Malota, M., Mabhaudhi, T., 2022. Water-energy-food nexus
ence convened by the World Bank in Marrakesh. tools in theory and practice: a systematic review. Front. Water 4, 1–21.
Messerli, P., Bader, C., Hett, C., Epprecht, M., Heinimann, A., 2015. Towards a spatial under- Tan, Y., Dong, Z., Guzman, S.M., Wang, X., Yan, W., 2021. Identifying the dynamic evolution
standing of trade-offs in sustainable development: a meso-scale analysis of the nexus be- and feedback process of water resources nexus system considering socioeconomic devel-
tween land use, poverty, and environment in the Lao PDR. PLoS One 10, e0133418. opment, ecological protection, and food security: a practical tool for sustainable water
Mofijur, M., et al., 2021. Impact of COVID-19 on the social, economic, environmental and en- use. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 25, 6495–6522.
ergy domains: lessons learnt from a global pandemic. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 26, Tudose, N.C., et al., 2021. Mainstreaming the nexus approach in climate services will enable
343–359. coherent local and regional climate policies. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 12, 752–755.
Mukhtarov, F.G., 2008. Intellectual history and current status of integrated water resources Turner, B.L., et al., 2003. Illustrating the coupled human-environment system for vulnerability
management: a global perspective. In: Pahl-Wostl, C., Kabat, P., Möltgen, J. (Eds.), Adap- analysis: three case studies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 100, 8080–8085.
tive and Integrated Water Management: Coping with Complexity and Uncertainty. UN, 2019. World Population Prospects 2019. Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 167–185. United Nations.
Nathaniel, S., Khan, S.A.R., 2020. The nexus between urbanization, renewable energy, trade, UNECE, 2015. Reconciling Resource Uses in Transboundary Basins: Assessment of the Water-
and ecological footprint in ASEAN countries. J. Clean. Prod. 272, 122709. Food-Energy-Ecosystems Nexus. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe,
Newell, J.P., Goldstein, B., Foster, A., 2019. A 40-year review of food-energy-water nexus lit- United Nations.
erature and its application to the urban scale. Environ. Res. Lett. 14, 073003. van Vuuren, D.P., et al., 2019. Integrated scenarios to support analysis of the food–energy–
O’Neill, B.C., et al., 2017. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways de- water nexus. Nat. Sustain. 2, 1132–1141.
scribing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Chang. 42, 169–180. van Vuuren, D.P., et al., 2022. Defining a sustainable development target space for 2030 and
Ostrom, E., 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological sys- 2050. One Earth 5, 142–156.
tems. Science 325, 419–422. van Zanten, J.A., van Tulder, R., 2021. Improving companies’ impacts on sustainable develop-
Pedercini, M., Arquitt, S., Collste, D., Herren, H., 2019. Harvesting synergy from sustainable ment: a nexus approach to the SDGS. Bus. Strateg. Environ. 30, 3703–3720.
development goal interactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 116, 23021–23038. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development), 1987. Our Common Future.
Phulkerd, S., et al., 2022. Moving from silos to synergies: strengthening governance of food United Nations through the Oxford University Press.
marketing policy in Thailand. Global. Health 18, 29. WEF, 2011. Water Security: The Water-Food-Energy-Climate Nexus. The World Economic
Proctor, K., Tabatabaie, S.M.H., Murthy, G.S., 2021. Gateway to the perspectives of the food- Forum.
energy-water nexus. Sci. Total Environ. 764, 142852. Werners, S.E., et al., 2021. Advancing climate resilient development pathways since the
Ravallion, M., 2020. On measuring global poverty. Annu. Rev. Econom. 12, 167–188. IPCC’s fifth assessment report. Environ. Sci. Policy 126, 168–176.
Ritchie, H., Roser, M., 2014. Natural disasters. Retrieved from OurWorldInData.org (10 May WWF (World Wide Fund For Nature), 2020. Living Planet Report 2020 - Bending the Curve of
2022) https://ourworldindata.org/natural-disasters. Biodiversity Loss. WWF, Gland, Switzerland.
Runting, R.K., et al., 2017. Incorporating climate change into ecosystem service assessments Xu, Z., et al., 2020. Impacts of irrigated agriculture on food–energy–water–CO2 nexus across
and decisions: a review. Glob. Chang. Biol. 23, 28–41. metacoupled systems. Nat. Commun. 11, 5837.
Sachs, I., 1982. The Food-Energy Nexus Subprogramme. Proposal prepared for the United Na- York, D.W., Narum, D.R., 1996. The lessons and legacy of integrated resource planning.
tions University, Tokyo. ACEEE Proceedings. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Washington,
Sachs, I., Silk, D., 1990. Food and Energy – Strategies for Sustainable Development. United DC, pp. 179–188.
Nations University Press, The United Nations University, Tokyo. Yuan, M.-H., Lo, S.-L., 2022. Principles of food-energy-water nexus governance. Renew. Sust.
Sant, G., Dixit, S., 1996. Beneficiaries of IPS subsidy and impact of tariff hike. Econ. Polit. Energ. Rev. 155, 111937.
Wkly. 31, 3315–3321. Yue, Q., Guo, P., 2021. Managing agricultural water-energy-food-environment nexus consid-
Scott, C.A., Kurian, M., Wescoat Jr., J.L., 2015. The water-energy-food nexus: enhancing adap- ering water footprint and carbon footprint under uncertainty. Agric. Water Manag. 252,
tive capacity to complex global challenges. In: Kurian, M., Ardakanian, R. (Eds.), 106899.
Governing the Nexus: Water, Soil and Waste Resources Considering Global Change. Yue, Q., Zhang, F., Wang, Y., Zhang, X., Guo, P., 2021. Fuzzy multi-objective modelling for
Springer, Cham, pp. 15–38. managing water-food-energy-climate change-land nexus towards sustainability.
Shah, T., Scott, C., Kishore, A., Sharma, A., 2003. Energy-irrigation Nexus in South Asia: Im- J. Hydrol. 596, 125704.
proving Groundwater Conservation and Power Sector Viability. IWMI Research Report Zhang, T., Tan, Q., Yu, X., Zhang, S., 2020. Synergy assessment and optimization for water-
No. 70. International Water Management Institute, Colombo, Sri Lanka https://doi.org/ energy-food nexus: modeling and application. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 134, 110059.
10.3910/2009.088. Zhang, Y.F., Li, Y.P., Huang, G.H., Ma, Y., Zhou, X., 2021. Planning a water–food–energy–
Shahid, I.A., et al., 2021. Nexus between household energy and poverty in poorly documented ecology nexus system toward sustainability: a copula bi-level fractional programming
developing economies—perspectives from Pakistan. Sustainability 13, 10894. method. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 9, 15212–15228.
Siegfried, T.U., Fishman, R., Modi, V., Lall, U., 2008. An Entitlement Approach to Address the Zhao, Y., et al., 2022. Simulating the economic and environmental effects of integrated poli-
Water-Energy-Food Nexus in Rural India. 1. AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, p. 0846. cies in energy-carbon-water nexus of China. Energy 238, 121783.
Simpson, G.B., Jewitt, G.P.W., 2019. The development of the water-energy-food nexus as a Zhou, Y., Ma, M., Kong, F., Wang, K., Bi, J., 2018. Capturing the co-benefits of energy effi-
framework for achieving resource security: a review. Front. Environ. Sci. 7, 1–9. ciency in China — a perspective from the water-energy nexus. Resour. Conserv. Recycl.
Slorach, P.C., Jeswani, H.K., Cuéllar-Franca, R., Azapagic, A., 2020. Environmental sustain- 132, 93–101.
ability in the food-energy-water-health nexus: a new methodology and an application
to food waste in a circular economy. Waste Manag. 113, 359–368.

12

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy