Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Hydrology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhydrol

The water–food–energy Nexus – Realising a new paradigm

Alex Smajgl a,⇑, John Ward b, Lucie Pluschke c
a
MERFI, Mekong Region Futures Institute, Petchaburi Rd, Bangkok 10400, Thailand
b
MERFI, Mekong Region Futures Institute, Naga House, Vientiane, Lao Democratic People’s Republic
c
FAO, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, Roma, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o s u m m a r y

Article history: The water–food–energy Nexus has emerged as a new perspective in debates concerned with balancing
Received 10 February 2015 potentially conflicting sectoral imperatives of large scale development investments concerned with
Received in revised form 16 December 2015 energy, water or food security. Current frameworks are partial as they largely represent a water-
Accepted 18 December 2015
centric perspective. Our hypothesis is that a dynamic Nexus framework that attempts to equally weight
Available online 24 December 2015
This manuscript was handled by Geoff
sectoral objectives provides a new paradigm for diagnosis and investigation. Dynamic refers here to
Syme, Editor-in-Chief explicitly understanding (or a diagnosis of) the dynamic relationships and ripple effects whereas
static-comparative refers to a comparison of states before and after change. This paper proposes a
Keywords:
balanced Nexus framework and presents results from an application to the Mekong basin. The analysis
Nexus identified the advantages of a sectorally balanced, dynamic Nexus approach, in particular the ability to
Water reveal either the emergence of cross-sectoral connections, or changes in those connections, as a
Food consequence of single sector interventions.
Energy Ó 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Mekong
Sustainability

1. Introduction and reinforced by two decades of conventions developing the

The water–food–energy Nexus has emerged as a new perspec-
tive to structure large-scale investments, its conceptual relevance
and pragmatic potential emphasised by many policy makers dur-
ing various supra-national fora. The key rationale for the Nexus
discussion is that historical sectoral investments have generally
been geared to prescribed, sector specific objectives and optima
without cross-sectoral coordination, exposing the Nexus to a high
risk of unintended side-effects and negative sectoral trade-offs. The
systems approach to Nexus interactions applied here is consistent
with inter alia, Hussey and Pittock (2012) and Newell et al. (2011)
(as cited in Hussey and Pittock) summarised as: ‘‘a system’s perfor-
mance cannot be optimized by optimizing the performance of its sub-
systems taken in isolation from one another . . .efforts to avoid
unwanted policy outcomes and to identify leverage points for effective
change must take into account the effect of interactions between
sectors.”
Developing investment strategies based on the Nexus architec-
ture demands a clearer focus of integrated research, continuing the
process introduced at the United Nations Conference on the
Human Environment (UN 1972, cited in Muller Muller (2015))
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +66 956571200.
E-mail addresses: alex.smajgl@mekongfutures.com (A. Smajgl), john.ward@
mekongfutures.com (J. Ward), lucie.pluschke@fao.org (L. Pluschke).
notion of sustainability paradigms articulated and prescribed in
the 1990s (Muller, 2015). Since gaining political momentum in
2008, conceptual variants and revisions of the Nexus conceptuali-
sation have been developed in the science domain (Benson et al.,
2015) and one actual Nexus study has been implemented in the
Mekong basin (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b). Consistent with, for
example, Bach et al. (2012), we argue that existing Nexus frame-
works remain largely water-centric and therefore partial, by privi-
leging one sector over others. By establishing evidence that current
Nexus analyses are insufficiently cross-sectoral and presenting evi-
dence of a balanced Nexus approach that assigns equal sectoral
weighting, we propose this paper is more effectively positioned
to provide novel insights for understanding cross-sectoral dynam-
ics. We describe a balanced Nexus framework and the results of an
application in the Mekong region to diagnose and analyse Nexus
interactions. We address the question of how the Nexus paradigm
can be applied to become an innovative and effective approach to
assist integrated, multi-sectoral policy deliberations. In conclusion,
we examine the additional benefits a Nexus perspective yields by
testing implementation options and results to move the debate
from a largely conceptual, abstract domain to actual implementa-
tion. Application and analysis of the Nexus framework in the
Greater Mekong sub-region identified the improved capability to
identify and diagnose cross-sectoral interactions as a key advan-
tage of a dynamic Nexus approach compared to static assessments.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2015.12.033
0022-1694/Ó 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
534 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
The dynamic approach revealed how the occurrence, valency and
magnitude of sectoral connections emerge and are altered as a con-
sequence of single sector interventions in a water–food–energy
Nexus.
2. From a water-centric to an integrated conceptualisation of
the Nexus
The World Economic Forum (WEF) has been among the first
organisations to identify the water–food–energy Nexus as a key
development challenge, calling for a better understanding of the
inter-linkages between water, energy and food at the 2008 Annual
Meeting in Davos (WEF, 2011a,b). The World Economic Forum
(WEF) Water Initiative explored water security in relation to
energy and food systems, climate, economic growth and human
security challenges, and the Water Resources Group launched a
Nexus initiative with water security as a practical entry point
(WEF, 2011a,b). Consistent with the WEF, the Bonn 2011 Nexus
conference also emphasised the centrality of water resources
(Hoff, 2011; Benson et al., 2015). However, focusing on water
undermines the original intention of developing an explicit
cross-sectoral perspective and response options that supersede
traditional sectoral approaches. Isolated sectoral investment risks
prioritising the goals of one specific sector – in this case, water –
over others.
A recurring criticism of the Nexus approach is that it represents
a variant of existing ‘‘integrated approaches” to design and assess
investments across multiple sectors and yields relatively minor
additional dividends. For instance, Odendaal (2002) contends that
Integrated Water Resource Management (IWRM) pursues the inte-
grated and coordinated management of water and land as a means
of balancing resource protection while meeting social and ecolog-
ical needs and promoting economic development. IWRM focuses
on balancing the objectives, motivation and values of diverse and
often competing water interests. However, in reviewing the IWRM
concept and attendant empirical evidence, Bohensky et al. (2009)
and Medema et al. (2008) argue there has been a reluctance to for-
mulate an agreed definition and to specify operational and imple-
mentation mechanisms. Reluctance may reflect a preference for
IWRM to be context specific, but it has led to an excess of defini-
tions, semantic skirmishes and diverse and competing understand-
ing. ‘‘Furthermore, it contradicts itself in purporting to be holistic, by
having water – rather than all natural resources and their inter-
linkages – as its central focus” (Bohensky et al., 2009, p. 14). Shah
(2009, p. 199) for example, argues that efforts in Asia and Africa
to introduce IWRM have attempted to impose prescribed water
use entitlements, sovereign rights and water trading as ‘‘endpoint”
outcomes, rather than promoting ‘‘entry point” deliberative pro-
cesses to discover IWRM adaptations aligned to the local water
shed context. Muller (2015) contends that despite deliberative
engagement, IWRM advocates concede that effective IWRM initia-
tives have been limited, particularly evident in low and medium
Human Development Index countries where, according to UNEP
(2012), progress has slowed or even regressed.
Similarly the Nexus is not immune from ongoing debate and
critiques. Benson et al. (2015) for example highlight the lack of
agreed definitions and praxis, stating that Nexus conceptualisa-
tions are far from unified, varying according to the focus of sectoral
integration, the geopolitical context and empirical foci of research.
In addition to the lack of precise terms and the tendency to revert
to single sector perspectives, another critique of the Nexus
approach (as implemented to date) concerns barriers to equitable
distribution. Leese and Meisch (2015) argue that the reframing of
Nexus security as a sustainability mechanism compromised the
Bonn 2011 claim that the needs of the poorest were a Nexus
priority.
Foran (2015) argues that the dominant conceptualisations artic-
ulated in the Nexus literature are fundamentally depoliticised, fail-
ing to account for historical social and political trajectories that
give rise to contemporary water, food and energy planning and
regulatory regimes. It is these sector specific regimes that have,
and continue to impose net costs on the poor and corresponding
distributional disparities. Foran (2015) argues that incorporating
social and political context, essential for effective cross sectoral
negotiations, can be achieved by reconceptualising the Nexus as
the cumulative effects of development projects coupled with an
appraisal of prevailing water, food and energy ‘‘provisioning” reg-
ulatory and planning regimes.
The Nexus debate was stimulated by the Bonn Conference and
coincided with the development of a few Nexus conceptualisations
(Benson et al., 2015). Several concepts, frameworks and method-
ologies have looked at the inter-linkages between water, energy
and food (Mohtar and Daher, 2012; ADB, 2013; Bizikova et al.,
2013; UN-ESCAP, 2013), but also land and soil (European Report
on Development, 2012; Hoff et al., 2013), minerals (Andrews-
Speed et al., 2012), and ecosystems (ICIMOD, 2012; UNECE Task
Force on Water–Energy–Food–Ecosystems, 2013). Yet the
approaches differ greatly in their scope, objectives and under-
standing of either interdependent or causal factors as the following
three examples illustrate.
The Qatar Environment and Energy Research Institute (QEERI)
developed a conceptual framework and tool that addresses the
Qatari context of water scarcity, arid lands and a high dependency
on food imports (Mohtar and Daher, 2012). Qatar’s food security is
the central focus of the Nexus investigation (QEERI, 2012) where
Nexus inter-linkages are described in terms of the sources and
scarcity of resources required to produce and import food. The
QEERI Nexus framework does not explore other cross-sectoral
interactions and the dynamics and state of the natural
environment.
The European Report on Development (ERD) (2012) focuses on
the management of water, energy and land resources across sec-
tors subject to increasing relative scarcity and prices, based on
changes in climate, global population and economic growth. The
entry point for analysis is the integrated management of water,
land and energy resources. The report examines cross-sectoral
inter-linkages – for example, of land management policies and
the implications for different natural resources. The report does
not articulate Nexus-wide, ripple effects of policies on baseline
conditions and factors, which represent the initial foundation of
policy design.
UNECE has developed a methodology to assess the water–ene
rgy–food–ecosystems Nexus in transboundary rivers and aquifers
(UNECE Task Force on Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems, 2013).
The method proposes a consultative, open-ended process to iden-
tify the ‘‘complex chains of cause-effects that link human interven-
tions to environmental degradation and availability of resources”
(UNECE Task Force on Water-Energy-Food-Ecosystems, 2013, p.
1). There are four dimensions of analysis – natural environment;
economic uses and needs; future trends, drivers, and strategies;
and transboundary agreements, governing bodies and policies –
to understand how natural resources and ecosystems are
impacted. Conceptually, these impacts are presented as ‘‘chains”
of causal, linear linkages, rather than ‘‘systems” of multiple and
dynamic inter-linkages as we argue in the remainder of the paper.
We therefore depart from both water-centric conceptualisa-
tions and static Nexus approaches. The dynamic Nexus approach
described in this paper emphasises the continuous interaction
between (1) the three sectors and between (2) the Nexus core
and the three Nexus sectors. The Nexus core consists of drivers
critical for water, food and energy sector dynamics and cross-
sector feedbacks (Fig. 1). For the purpose of this paper we limit
 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
the complexity of (interacting) variables in the Nexus core by only
considering population growth and climate change as the key dri-
vers that determine the status of ecosystem services.
Such a nested conceptualisation is critical for Nexus-type anal-
yses to develop a better understanding of multi-sectoral interac-
tions as interdependent and dynamic. In turn, sectoral outcomes
feedback on and influence the attributes of core drivers, creating
sustained interactions. Later in this paper we argue that dynamic
processes cause the constituent Nexus factors (illustrated within
the diagram) to improve/expand or deteriorate/contract. Amend-
ments to Nexus factors are expressed as either the qualitative or
quantitative change of sectoral outputs, the characteristics of sec-
toral interaction, or the condition of the core drivers.
Fig. 1 depicts a range of typical interactions in the cross-sectoral
connections. Later we argue that a Nexus perspective provides
most benefit in inter-sectoral negotiations if these connections
are understood as continuously evolving linkages, decomposed
for the actual application context. Policy interventions can be made
in any one of the food, water or energy sectors and we assume that
historically, decision-making has been largely sector specific and
independent. Fig. 1 depicts three discrete entry points, introducing
sector specific interests. As mentioned earlier, the Nexus approach
aims for cross-sector coordination instead of sector specific optima
to avoid unintended side-effects and negative sectoral trade-offs.
Application of a sectorally balanced Nexus approach acts as a
device to stimulate debate to improve sectoral coordination –
potentially to reconcile investments that would be treated as
sub-optimal by individual sectors, but that ultimately improve
overall system outcomes. Sustained debate can reveal three possi-
ble classes of interventions; those targeted at single sectors; at
inter-sectoral links manifest as critical nodes, and at altering the
Fig. 1. The energy–water–food Nexus.
535
status of core Nexus drivers. In the Mekong analysis discussed
here, the latter option is constrained to affecting population
change, investment in climate change mitigation strategies, or
safeguarding ecosystem services and functions.
From a cross-sectoral perspective, a Nexus conceptualisation
guides development investments and their analytical support
towards an explicit consideration of trade-offs. In the past some
advanced work in one sector such as food security has considered
some linkages to associated sectors, inter alia irrigation. However,
our Nexus conceptualisation demands of the researcher and deci-
sion maker an explicit and extensive consideration of sectoral
interdependencies. As a corollary, a comprehensive Nexus-based
food security analysis would also explicitly address the potential
trade-offs between energy and water. Such trade-offs might offset
or complement expected economic or social dividends of invest-
ments in the food security space. Coordinating investments and
developing consistent policies that allow for sustainable develop-
ment would ideally involve:
(a) a diagnosis and subsequent understanding of all sectoral
connections;
(b) specifying potential trade-offs and synergies for the speci-
fied context;
(c) the design of effective measures that help mitigate or recon-
cile trade-offs and exploit synergies; and
(d) ongoing monitoring and assessment of investment conse-
quences on Nexus dynamics.
We implemented the Nexus framework in the trans-boundary
context of the Mekong basin, first to translate the Nexus conceptu-
alisation from the abstract to application and second to empirically
536 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
test the hypothesis that Nexus framed negotiations lead to novel
policy insights and decisions.
3. Analysing the Nexus in the Mekong basin
3.1. Methods
The Delphi technique described in the paper represents one ele-
ment of a mixed method participatory approach designed to pro-
mote systems learning by Mekong national decision makers and
enable the discovery of cross sectoral solutions that account for
Nexus interactions. Other methodological elements included the
development of plausible and shared future visions (Foran et al.,
2013), participatory processes (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b; Smajgl
et al., 2015b) an elaborated monitoring and evaluation process
(Smajgl and Ward, 2015a,b) and agent based modelling results in
Yunnan (Smajgl et al., 2015c) and Vietnam (Smajgl et al., 2015a).
Uncertainty related to decision making and data was considered
by (1) analysing multiple scenarios, (2) focussing on qualitative
relationship, and (3) employing stochastic approaches.
Expert panels or Delphi techniques are commonly defined as ‘‘a
method for structuring a group communication process so that the
process is effective in allowing a group of individuals, as a whole, to
deal with a complex problem” (Linstone and Turoff, 1975, p. 3).
Consistent with Linstone and Turoff (2002) structured and facili-
tated deliberation, iterative amendments based on meeting discus-
sions and information refinements of the initial expert appraisals
were introduced to assist the panel to identify and address subjec-
tive biases and promote more impartial assessments.
Six sector specific analysts were commissioned to assess the
impacts of national development initiatives previously nominated
by Mekong specialists and decision makers with potentially Nexus
related consequences at both the national and regional levels
(Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b, pp. 13–16). The impending developed
initiatives were (1) a series of 12 hydropower dams on the lower
mainstream Mekong; (2) water diversion from Lao PDR into North-
east Thailand; (3) adaptation to sea-level rise in the Mekong delta;
(4) expansion of monoculture rubber plantations in Yunnan; (5)
railway expansion and (6) bauxite mining and possible alumina
production (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b). The assigned sectors were:
water (Pech, 2013); food security (Fullbrook, 2013); the Mekong
energy system (Foran, 2013); livelihoods and migration
(Bouapao, 2013), land use (Lu, 2013), and mining (Lazarus, 2013).
Each expert was asked to conduct a desktop assessment specific
to their assigned sector, of each of the six individual investments
followed by a cumulative assessment assuming all six develop-
ment investments would simultaneously occur. This first step
employs a traditional static comparative perspective. The cross-
sectoral Nexus assessment commenced with a structured and
facilitated workshop comprised of the six invited experts and ten
additional regional and agency experts to promote broader
assessment.
Several scholars (Zaleski, 1988; White, 1998; Halpern and Pearl,
2005) have pointed out the relevance of preconceived causal rela-
tionships, in particular those among researchers. Preconceptions
have the advantage that experienced experts are able to rapidly
and effectively synthesise the consequences of key potential
changes and are familiar with the most relevant contemporary evi-
dence. However, when considering multiple investments, marginal
effects can accumulate and manifest as substantial impacts. Conse-
quently, a revised methodology challenged experts to think outside
deeply entrained cause-effect narratives and confront existing
biases (each chapter in Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b articulates the
revised methodology). This workshop approach helped identifying
likely steps of possible ripple effects to detect inherent dynamics of
the Mekong-specific Nexus. Therefore, as a first phase, experts
were presented with the suite of sectoral assessments. Second,
experts were only confronted with the effects of development
investments, independent of proposed causal factors and determi-
nants. Third, the effects systematically listed within individual sec-
toral assessments were presented and experts asked to identify
likely sectoral reactions and events that would be activated by
these changes. The process allowed for an effective interaction
and intersecting of sectoral assessments. The process was repeated
to specify second and third order impacts. Finally, cause effect-
chains were constructed that were independent of individual sec-
toral perspectives and arranged in system diagrams. The final step
for conducting the cross-sectoral assessment included the analysis
of all six system diagrams, one for each chosen investment.
3.2. The status of Nexus dimensions in the Mekong basin
Nexus core
This section provides a snapshot of the framework dimensions,
the Nexus core and three Nexus sectors.
Table 1 presents information about the Nexus core at the level
of Mekong countries and the Chinese Province of Yunnan.
Population growth averages around 0.98% p.a. with Cambodia
having the highest growth rate of 1.67% p.a. followed by Lao PDR
with 1.63% p.a. (CIA, 2013; China Perspective, 2014).
Ecosystem service related information for Mekong countries is
scarce.
Table 1 lists deforestation and freshwater utilisation for agricul-
ture as two relevant indicators, indicating that ecosystems are
highly utilised (i.e. freshwater systems) and at least to some extent
managed unsustainably (i.e. forests in Myanmar and Lao PDR).
The Climate Risk Index (Harmeling and Eckstein, 2012) ranks
countries based on annually occurring human and economic losses
due to climate events (floods, droughts, other extreme events). The
index is used as an indicator that better reflects the current status
of the climate change dimension, compared to a singular reliance
on climate projections. Myanmar, Thailand and Vietnam rank
among the ten countries with the highest climate risk when the
long-term average is considered (1992–2011). Thailand was
ranked the country with the highest risk and Cambodia with the
second highest risk worldwide in 2011. This indicates that existing
capacity of Mekong countries to protect human lives and economic
assets from climate related events is extremely low. Climate pro-
jections point at a further increase of climate-related vulnerabili-
ties in the Mekong region (ICEM, 2013).
Mekong water security
The Mekong region consists of five large river basins; the Irra-
waddy, the Salween, the Chao Phraya, the Mekong, and the Red
River. Apart from the Chao Phraya, trans-boundary challenges are
caused by upstream changes to water resource utilisation, largely
for food production and energy purposes. Generally changes create
negative externalities for downstream countries, communities and
river dependent ecosystems. The Mekong River is at today’s fore-
front of experiencing large-scale, rapid development interventions.
Until the late 20th century, the Mekong River remained a relatively
unmodified river system of low impoundment, connecting the pri-
mary livelihood pursuits of agriculture, fishing and forestry of a
predominately rural population (Molle et al., 2009). However, the
steep elevation gradients of the headwaters and upper catchments
of the main tributaries have provided opportunities for impound-
ments and hydropower generation, tentatively coexisting with bio-
diversity hotpots, small scale, localised irrigation, and swidden
agriculture. The rapid gradient transition to the extensive plains
and deltas has allowed water diversions for agrarian landscapes,
including extensive irrigation in the delta, inland and coastal
fisheries, and river-based transport.
 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
Table 1
Population (in million people), annual population growth in per cent, and area in km2 (CIA, 2013; China Perspective, 2014); average annual change of forested area in per cent and
freshwater withdrawal for agriculture in per cent of available freshwater (ADB, 2012); Climate Risk Index (Harmeling and Eckstein, 2012).
Population
Million people Growth (%) Area (km2)
Thailand 67.5 0.52 513,120
Vietnam 92.5 1.03 331,210
Lao PDR 6.7 1.63 236,800
Cambodia 15.2 1.67 181,035
Myanmar 55.2 1.05 676,578
Yunnan (2010) 46.0 1.15 394,000
Mekong energy security
Foran (2013, Table 21) uses a vector of eight dimensions,
described by 13 measurable indicators to account for the multiple
factors influencing the status of national energy security of
Mekong countries. Foran (2013) estimates average annual growth
rate of primary energy supply for 2005–2025 at 4.9%, moderating
to 4.4% in 2025. Supply is estimated to increase from approxi-
mately 10,000 PJ (petajoule = 1015 J) in 2005 to approximately
25,000 PJ in 2025. The top three sources of primary energy in
2005 were crude oil, biomass, and coal; by 2025 they are projected
to be coal, crude oil, and biomass. The share of hydroelectricity in
the region’s primary energy supply was projected to grow from 2%
to 5.5% during 2005–25, an annual growth rate of almost ten per
cent. Final aggregate energy demand for the Mekong countries in
2025 was estimated at 20,000 PJ. Foran (2013) estimates the sup-
ply contribution of hydropower generation to meet aggregate elec-
tricity demand will increase from 20% in 2005 to 35% in 2025.
Mekong food security
Fullbrook (2013) describes four primary dimensions that influ-
ence the status of food security in Mekong countries: availability,
accessibility, utilisation, and stability. Derived from the Global
Hunger index, Fullbrook (2013) notes that national food security
has improved for all Mekong countries from 1990 through 2011,
however food security in Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar remain
classed as serious or alarming. Twenty-five per cent and 31%
respectively of the Cambodian and Laos population were classed
as undernourished (FAO, 2011). Hall and Bouapao (2010) argue
that the daily calorific intake of Mekong communities in Cambodia,
Isan and the Vietnam Delta are especially sensitive to estimated
fish catch reductions (and associated protein loss) and likely to
result in nutrition levels below the recommended 1864 calories
per day.
Intended development strategies
In consultation with national decision makers and decision
influencers across the Mekong basin (details for the participatory
process can be found in Smajgl et al., 2015b) the following devel-
opment strategies were identified in this project:
– Hydropower (led by the energy perspective).
– Energy crops (led by the energy perspective).
– Irrigation projects (led by the food perspective).
– Water diversion (led by the water perspective).
There is a potential for substantial trade-offs for each of the
three sectors, which we analyse in the following section. Many of
these trade-offs occur in the trans-boundary context, as the
Mekong region is highly connected, allowing effects to ripple
quickly and widely through the ’system’. Connecting dynamics
include human migration, natural resource flows and increasing
levels of private and State financial investments (Dore, 2003;
537
Ecosystem-related uses Climate risk index
Forest area: annual change (avrg.) Freshwater withdrawal for agriculture 1992–2011(avrg.)–2011
0% (2000–10) 90% (2007) 9–1
+1.6% (2000–10) 94.78% (2009) 6–15
0.5% (2005–10) 90% (2010) 68–8
1.2% (2005–10) 94% (2006) 28–2
0.9% (2000–10) 90.9% (2010) 2–24
+1.34% (2000–10) 64.6% (2010) 23–20
Harima et al., 2003; Theeravit, 2003; Contreras, 2007). For example
investors from China, Thailand and Vietnam increasingly replace
traditional donor organisations in order to source natural resources
or manufacturing capacity in neighbouring countries (Middleton
et al., 2009; Molle et al., 2009). The effects of large scale invest-
ments in weakly connected regions are generally constrained to
locales proximate to the initial investment area within a particular
country and tend to be limited to the investing sector. In contrast
high connectivity implies that investment factors (or drivers) inter-
act, transmitting the effects of substantial changes from one part of
a region to another and to other sectors.
3.3. Static comparative Nexus analysis results
Before describing the additional insight that resulted from a
dynamic analysis, we outline water resource development, food
production and energy security as examples of a static comparative
analysis. Sectoral experts analysed the four development options
based on a Nexus-based methodology (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,
b). Biophysical and economic assumptions underpinning
development-directed interventions were derived from available
scientific evidence. Sectoral experts identified and assessed the
direct primary impacts of development investments on their desig-
nated sector. First order sectoral effects were subsequently
assigned to other sectoral experts and imputed as changes to iden-
tify probable second order effects. This methodological step was
repeated to identify tertiary impacts within the Nexus to trace
some possible feedback dynamics.
The implementation of a Nexus analysis of development strate-
gies in the Mekong basin disclosed a range of likely trade-offs.
Hydropower development has been identified as the dominating
intervention (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b), likely to substantially
alter the hydrological regime and as a consequence, the availability
of water during the year and between countries. If combined with
planned large-scale irrigation projects the dry season flow is likely
to increase by 70% in Thailand and Lao PDR but only by 10% in Viet-
nam’s Mekong Delta (Pech, 2013). The upstream advantage is asso-
ciated with an increased risk of dam operational floods replacing
natural floods, that could, based on recent experiences increase river
water levels by up to 6 m for 40–50 km downstream from a reser-
voir (Pech, 2013). Thorne et al. (2013, Table 3) argue that substantial
economic losses would occur for farmers in the Vietnam Mekong
Delta as the approximately 160–200  106 t/year of sediment are
estimated to be reduced by 55–100%, depending on how many
planned dams are constructed. Reductions in associated nutrient
loads are estimated at 20–65%, requiring substantial investments
to replace fertiliser inputs to maintain current production levels.
From a food perspective the cumulative consequences of the
development decisions outlined above are likely to include a sub-
stantial reduction in fish stocks and fish diversity, increasing regio-
nal dependence on imported food and, thereby increasing food
prices (Hortle, 2007; Fullbrook, 2013). The two latter consequences
538 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
are likely to intensify as more irrigation potential is utilised for
energy crops instead of food crops.
From an energy perspective power generation capacity is likely
to increase and, by lifting power constraints for the manufacturing
sectors, gross domestic product is likely to increase (Foran, 2013).
However, energy prices are also likely to increase as a function of
rising infrastructure and implementation costs (Foran, 2013).
Some of the insights listed above could have been identified
without an explicit water, food and energy Nexus investigation.
However, the iterative expert panel process revealed a novel and
critical aspect: the occurrence, valency and magnitude of sectoral
connections that emerge and are altered as a consequence of single
sector interventions in the water–food–energy Nexus. Thus, identi-
fying Nexus dynamics emerged as the most critical step.
3.4. Dynamic Nexus analysis results
The improved understanding of sectoral linkages and Nexus-
wide dynamics reveals a set of elements that are important in
‘transmitting’ ripple effects throughout the Nexus system. The
Mekong investigations revealed that what is typically conceptu-
alised as a simple arrow (eg. in Fig. 1) is more accurately described
as a series of interlinked variables. Within these variable links we
refer to those connections that substantially influence the valency
and magnitude of sectoral feedbacks and the overall Nexus out-
comes as system criticalities. Cross-sector feedbacks and the proba-
bility of more sustainable outcomes are contingent on the state of
these system criticalities. Prioritising development investments to
manage and sustain the state of system criticalities is therefore an
alternative or complementary approach to direct investments in
either the food, water or energy sectors. Such an approach would
ensure that decisions are based on the Nexus as a dynamic system
and allow for management of the Nexus as a holistic entity, rather
than independent elements.
The investigation of Nexus relations and properties in the
Mekong basin identified five system criticalities:
 Transboundary fish stock management
If fish stocks were explicitly managed in the transboundary con-
text of the Mekong basin, the outcomes of development interven-
tions in the water–food–energy Nexus are likely to be more
sustainable. This is largely due to the positive side-effects of
safe-guarding fish stocks; these include the circumvention of
transboundary changes of water flows, the shifting flood risks
and the relocation of sedimentation dynamics and reduction of
sediment/nutrient loss.
 Instruments to manage risks from monocultures
The substantial push towards economic efficiency in land use
planning coincides with increasing risks as land use diversity
declines. The phenomenon of increasing mono-cultures largely
concerns energy crops and rubber, and emerges as a central
inter-linkage between water, food, and energy. Focussed manage-
ment of monoculture development through risk management
instruments could be vital to avoid substantial breakdowns
between Nexus sectors. Community-scale micro-insurance sys-
tems could be explored as one possible instrument for safeguard-
ing this specific system criticality.
 Strategies to avoid migration peaks due to change in access to
natural resources
Some development decisions can trigger short-term responses
among the population in parts of the region, leading to either
immigration or emigration peaks. Putting strategies in place to
mitigate such peaks would help avoid unsustainable trajectories
as sudden migration dynamics are associated with attendant
changes to natural resource utilisation. Anticipating migration
dynamics and adapting institutional arrangements, for example
for fishing, could prevent resource collapse. Substantial repercus-
sions generated by hydropower and irrigation projects for the Viet-
nam Delta could trigger large-scale emigration to Vietnamese
urban centres and across the Cambodian border to the Tonle Sap
(where many ethnic Vietnamese reside). As a consequence, a rapid
increase in fishing exposes already stressed fish stocks in the Tonle
Sap to further unplanned pressures.
 Labour transition from primary to secondary sectors in the
context of urban growth
The interaction between Nexus sectors also depends on how
many households remain productive in primary sectors. The more
households that engage in secondary and tertiary sectors and the
more that reside in urban residences, the more that electricity
demand is likely to grow. Also, the more that institutional arrange-
ments concerned with land ownership are secure and the more
that management anticipate such labour transition from primary
to secondary and tertiary sector livelihoods, the more likely it is
that unproductive land and inefficient irrigation (eg. in Northeast
Thailand) can be avoided.
 Management of energy demand instead of a singular focus on
energy supply
Many energy sector intervention options currently target an
expansion of power generation capacity and supply, However,
many of the negative side effects emerging from the Mekong anal-
ysis of Nexus-wide dynamics could be avoided if supply options
were combined with a genuine consideration of demand interven-
tions, such as energy saving campaigns or monetary incentives to
change consumptive behaviour and habits that underpin increas-
ing energy demand.
In synthesis, identifying the ensemble of system criticalities and
understanding them as intervention points could, if effectively
managed, guide Nexus interactions to yield more sustainable
outcomes.
4. Discussion
The paper describes a Nexus framework and conceptually con-
sistent analysis geared to the sectoral attributes and impending
development imperatives in the Mekong basin. We argue that a
sectorally balanced, dynamic Nexus framework, compared to a
hydro-centric or static approach, introduces a new operational
paradigm. Testing of the balanced Nexus frameworks provided
supportive evidence, revealing novel, emergent insights when
deliberations treat sectors as elements of a dynamic rather than
a static Nexus system. The equal weighting of the water, food
and energy sectors was introduced as an initial analytical condition
and central to the analytical rationale. Competing approaches that
bias the weighting of one specific sector, for example water
resources, tend to constrain analysis to the connections of one or
possibly two of the other sectors.
The static Nexus analysis demands that researchers initially
consider the links between their sector of expertise and explana-
tory variables and a comprehensive assessment of connectivity
between all of the three sectors. In addition, the interactions and
trade-offs that occur between the two other sectors were analysed,
 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
which potentially harbor important feedbacks for the initial sector
under investigation.
The dynamic analysis revealed that interventions in the Nexus
could change the magnitude and valency of sectoral interactions.
This presents the Nexus as a continuously evolving system and pro-
poses the management of system criticalities to produce more sus-
tainable outcomes instead of forcing each individual sector into a
targeted state. This perspective translates system criticalities into
policy relevant intervention points for holistically managing the
Nexus towards more sustainable outcomes. The focus on system
criticalities potentially overcomes the reduced system dividends
of development investments geared to a single resource or develop-
ment sector.
The implementation of our Nexus framework revealed four main
lessons learnt relevant for further applications in contexts outside
the Mekong region. First, our framework minimises sector-related
biases and allows for identification of a wider range of trade-offs.
Second, it is important to minimise cause-effect related biases held
by experts to produce a coherent picture of possible ripple effects
and, thereby, identify system criticalities. The iterative approach
we described is one possible approach to reduce such biases. Third,
a more robust Nexus analysis is likely if the quantification of trade-
offs is not only based on secondary data but supported by primary
data and modelling. Fourth, the conceptual understanding of sys-
tem criticalities needs to be translated into policy-relevant entry
points, which requires an effective embedding of the research in a
cross-sector dialogue (Smajgl and Ward, 2013a,b; Hassenforder
et al., 2015; Smajgl and Ward, 2015a,b).
References
ADB, 2012. GMS Atlas of the Environment, second ed. Philippines Asian
Development Bank, Manila.
ADB, 2013. Thinking About Water Differently: Managing the Water–Food–Energy
Nexus. Asian Development Bank (ADB), Mandaluyong City, Philippines.
Andrews-Speed, P., Bleischwitz, R., Boersma, T., Johnson, C., Kemp, G., VanDeveer, S.
D., 2012. The global resource nexus. The Struggles for Land, Energy, Food,
Water, and Minerals. Transatlantic Academy, Washington D.C., USA.
Bach, H., Bird, J., Clausen, T.J., Jensen, K.M., Lange, R.B., Taylor, R., Viriyasakultorn, V.,
Wolf, A., 2012. Transboundary River Basin Management: Addressing Water,
Energy and Food Security. Mekong River Commission, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
Benson, D., Gain, A.K., Rouillard, J.J., 2015. Water governance in a comparative
perspective: from IWRM to a ‘nexus’ approach? Water Altern. 8 (1), 756–773.
Bizikova, L., Roy, D., Swanson, D., Venema, H.D., McCandless, M., 2013. The Water–
Energy–Food Security Nexus: Towards a Practical Planning and Decision-
Support Framework for Landscape Investment and Risk Management.
International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Winnipeg, Canada.
Bohensky, E., Connell, D., Taylor, B., 2009. Experiences with Integrated River Basin
Management, International and Murray Darling Basin: Lessons for Norther
Australia. Norther Australia Land and Water Science Review, Canberra, CSIRO.
Bouapao, L., 2013. Livelihoods and migration. The Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the
Mekong Region: Assessing Development Strategies Considering Cross-Sectoral
and Transboundary Impacts. Springer, New York, pp. 143–178.
China Perspective, 2014. The China Perspective.
CIA, 2013. The CIA Factbook, Central Intelligence Agency.
Contreras, A., 2007. Synthesis: discourse, power and knowledge. In: Lebel, L., Dore,
J., Daniel, R., Koma, Y.S. (Eds.), Democratizing Water Governance in the Mekong
Region. Mekong Press, Chiang Mai, pp. 227–236.
Dore, J., 2003. The governance of increasing Mekong regionalism. In: Kaosa-ard, M.,
Dore, J. (Eds.), Social Challenges for the Mekong Region. White Lotus, Bangkok,
pp. 405–440.
European Report on Development, 2012. Confronting Scarcity: Managing Water,
Energy and Land for Inclusive and Sustainable Growth. Brussels, Belgium,
European Commission, Overseas Development Institute (ODI), European Centre
for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), German Development Institute
(GDI/DIE).
FAO, 2011. The State of Food Insecurity in the World – How Does International Price
Volatility Affect Domestic Economies and Food Security? Rome, FAO.
Foran, T., 2013. Impacts of natural resource-led development on the Mekong energy
system. In: Smajgl, A., Ward, J. (Eds.), The Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the
Mekong Region: Assessing Development Strategies Considering Cross-Sectoral
and Transboundary Impacts. Springer, New York, pp. 105–142.
Foran, T., 2015. Node and regime: interdisciplinary analysis of water–energy–food
Nexus in the Mekong region. Water Altern. 8 (1), 655–674.
Foran, T., Ward, J., Kemp-Benedict, E., Smajgl, A., 2013. Developing detailed
foresight narratives: a participatory technique from the Mekong region. Ecol.
Soc. 18 (4), 6.
539
Fullbrook, D., 2013. Food security in the wider mekgion region. In: Smajgl, A., Ward,
J. (Eds.), The Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the Mekong Region. Springer, New
York, pp. 61–104.
Hall, D., Bouapao, L., 2010. Social Impact Monitoring and Vulnerability Assessment
in the Mekong Corridor: Report on a Regional Pilot Study. MRC Technical Paper
No. 30. Vientiane, Mekong River Commission, p. 146.
Halpern, J., Pearl, J., 2005. Causes and explanations: a structural-model approach,
part I: causes. Brit. J. Philos. Sci. 56 (4), 843–887.
Harima, R., Varona, R., DeFalco, C., 2003. Migration. In: Kaosa-ard, M., Dore, J. (Eds.),
Social Challenges for the Mekong Region. White Lotus, Bangkok, pp. 225–261.
Harmeling, S., Eckstein, D., 2012. Global Climate Risk Index 2013. Germanwatch,
Bonn, Germany.
Hassenforder, E., Smajgl, A., Ward, J., 2015. Towards understanding participatory
processes: framework, application and results. J. Environ. Manage. 157, 84–95.
Hoff, H., 2011. Understanding the Nexus. Background Paper for the Bonn2011
Conference: The Water, Energy and Food Security Nexus. Stockholm
Environment Institute (SEI), Stockholm, Sweden.
Hoff, H., Fielding, M., Davis, M., 2013. Turning vicious cycles into virtuous ones.
Rural 21 (03), 10–12.
Hortle, K.G., 2007. Consumption and the yield of fish and other aquatic animals
from the Lower Mekong Basin. Technical Paper No. 16. MRC. Mekong River
Commission, Vientiane, Lao PDR.
Hussey, K., Pittock, J., 2012. The energy–water Nexus: managing the links between
energy and water for a sustainable future. Ecol. Soc. 17 (1), 31. http://dx.doi.org/
10.5751/ES-04641-170131.
ICEM, 2013. USAID Mekong ARCC Climate Change Impact and Adaptation: Main
Report. Prepared for the United States Agency for International Development.
ICEM – International Centre for Environmental Management, Hanoi.
ICIMOD, 2012. Contribution of Himalayan Ecosystems to Water, Energy, and Food
Security in South Asia: A Nexus Approach. International Centre for Integrated
Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu, Nepal.
Lazarus, K., 2013. Mining in the Mekong region. In: Smajgl, A., Ward, J. (Eds.), The
Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the Mekong Region. Springer, New York, pp. 191–
208.
Leese, M., Meisch, S., 2015. Securitising sustainability? Questioning the ‘water,
energy and food-security Nexus’. Water Altern. 8 (1), 695–709.
Linstone, H.A., Turoff, M., 1975. Introduction. In: Linstone, H.A., Turoff, M. (Eds.), The
Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Adison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.
Linstone, H.A., Turoff, M., 2002. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications.
Murray Turoff and Harold Linstone.
Lu, X., 2013. Land-use change in the Mekong region. In: Smajgl, A., Ward, J. (Eds.),
The Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the Mekong Region. Springer, New York, pp.
179–189.
Medema, W., McIntosh, B.S., Jeffrey, P.J., 2008. From premise to practice: a critical
assessment of integrated water resources management and adaptive
management approaches in the water sector. Ecol. Soc. 13 (2), 18.
Middleton, C., Garcia, J., Foran, T., 2009. Old and new hydropower players in the
Mekong region: agendas and strategies. In: Molle, F., Foran, T., Käkönen, M.
(Eds.), Contested Waterscapes in the Mekong Region. Earhscan, London, UK;
Sterling, VA, pp. 23–54.
Mohtar, R.H., Daher, B., 2012. Water, energy, and food: the ultimate Nexus. In:
Heldman, D., Moraru, C.I. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Agricultural, Food, and
Biological Engineering, second ed. CRC Press.
Molle, F., Foran, T., Floch, P., 2009. Changing waterscapes in the Mekong region:
historical background and context. In: Molle, F., Foran, T., Käkönen, M. (Eds.),
Contested Waterscapes in the Mekong Region: Hydropower, Livelihoods and
Governance. Earthscan, London, pp. 1–21.
Muller, M., 2015. The ‘nexus’ as a step back towards a more coherent water resource
management paradigm. Water Altern. 8 (1), 675–694.
Newell, B., Marsh, D.M., Sharma, D., 2011. Enhancing the resilience of the Australian
National Electricity Market: taking a systems approach in policy development.
Ecol. Soc. 16 (2), 15, http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol16/iss12/art15/.
Odendaal, P.E., 2002. Integrated water resources management (IWRM), with special
reference to sustainable urban water management. Conference and Exhibition
on Integrated Environmental Management in South Africa (CEMSA) 2002.
Johannesburg, South Africa.
Pech, S., 2013. Water sector analysis. In: Smajgl, A., Ward, J. (Eds.), The Water–Food–
Energy Nexus in the Mekong Region: Assessing Development Strategies
Considering Cross-Sectoral and Trans-Boundary Impact. Springer, New York,
Berlin, pp. 19–60.
QEERI, 2012. Nexus 1.0. A Resource Management Strategy Guiding Tool. <http://
nexus-wef-tool.qeeri.org.qa/nexus/Home.aspx> (27.02.2014).
Shah, T., 2009. Taming the Anarchy: Groundwater Governance in South Asia.
Routledge, New Delhi.
Smajgl, A., Toan, T.Q., Nhan, D.K., Ward, J., Trung, N.H., Tri, L.Q., Tri, V.P.D., Vu, P.T.,
2015a. Responding to rising sea-levels in Vietnam’s Mekong Delta. Nat. Clim.
Change 5, 167–174.
Smajgl, A., Ward, J., 2013a. A framework for bridging science and decision making.
Futures 52 (8), 52–58.
Smajgl, A., Ward, J. (Eds.), 2013b. The Water–Food–Energy Nexus in the Mekong
Region. Springer, New York.
Smajgl, A., Ward, J., 2015a. A design protocol for research impact evaluation:
development investments of the Mekong region. J. Environ. Manage. 157, 311–
319.
Smajgl, A., Ward, J., 2015b. Evaluating participatory research: framework, methods
and implementation results. J. Environ. Manage. 157, 311–319.
540 A. Smajgl et al. / Journal of Hydrology 533 (2016) 533–540
Smajgl, A., Ward, J., Foran, T., Dore, J., Larson, S., 2015b. Visions, beliefs and
transformation: exploring cross-sector and trans-boundary dynamics in the
wider Mekong region. Ecol. Soc. 20 (2), 15.
Smajgl, A., Xu, J., Egan, S., Yi, Z.-F., Ward, J., Su, Y., 2015c. Assessing the effectiveness
of payments for ecosystem services for diversifying rubber in Yunnan, China.
Environ. Modell. Softw. 69, 187–195.
Theeravit, K., 2003. Relationships within and between the Mekong Region in the
context of globalisation. In: Kaosa-ard, M., Dore, J. (Eds.), Social Challenges for
the Mekong Region. Bangkok, White Lotus, pp. 49–80.
Thorne, C., Annandale, G., Jensen, J., Jensen, E., Green, T., Koponen, J., 2013.
Implications of Planned Mainstream and Tributary Dams in the Lower Mekong
Basin for Future Supplies of Sediment and Sediment-related Nutrients to the
Mekong Delta. Advancing Knowledge on Impacts to the Mekong Delta From
Reductions In Sediment And Nutrient Inflows Conference. M. IMHEN, SIWRP,
MARD and the Natural Heritage Institute, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
UN-ESCAP, 2013. Water–Food–Energy Nexus in Asia and the Pacific Region.
Discussion Paper. UN-ESCAP, Bangkok, Thailand.
UNECE Task Force on Water–Energy–Food–Ecosystems, 2013. Water–Food–
Energy–Ecosystems Nexus for Reconciling Different Uses in Transboundary
River Basins – UNECE Water Convention Draft Methodology. UNECE, Geneva,
Switzerland.
UNEP, 2012. The UN-Water Status Report on the Application of Integrated
Approaches to Water Resources Management. United Nations Environment
Programme, Nairobi, Kenya.
WEF, 2011. Global Risks 2011, sixth ed. World Economic Forum (WEF), Cologne/
Geneva.
WEF, Ed., 2011. Water Security: Water–Food–Energy–Climate Nexus. The World
Economic Forum Water Initiative. Island Press, Washington D.C., USA.
White, P.A., 1998. Causal judgement: use of different types of contingency
information as confirmatory and disconfirmatory. Eur. J. Cogn. Psychol. 10 (2),
131–170.
Zaleski, Z., 1988. Attributions and emotions related to future goal attainment. J.
Educ. Psychol. 80 (4), 563–568.