WATER USE IN LCA Water footprint of livestock: comparison of six geographically defined beef production systems Bradley G. Ridoutt & Peerasak Sanguansri & Michael Freer & Gregory S. Harper Received: 10 March 2011 /Accepted: 27 October 2011 /Published online: 30 November 2011 # Springer-Verlag 2011 Abstract Purpose Water use in the livestock sector has featured in the debate about sustainable food systems. Most evidence has come from virtual water calculations which lack impact assessment and adequate consideration of the heterogeneity in livestock production. This study sought new evidence, using a recently developed life cycle impact assessment method for water use to assess six geographically defined beef cattle production systems in New South Wales, Australia, a major production region. Methods The livestock production systems were diverse in farm practice (grass and feedlot finishing), product (year- ling to heavy steers), environment (high-rainfall coastal to semi-arid inland) and local water stress. Life cycle inventories were developed from representative farm enterprise budgets. The farm water use inventories sought to describe the impact of the production system on catchment water resources and included irrigation water use as well as the reduction in flows due to the operation of stock dams. Results and discussion The normalised life cycle impact category results for water use, referred to as the water footprint, ranged from 3.3 to 221 L H 2 Oe kg -1 live weight at farm gate. Due to variation in local water stress, the impact category results were not correlated with the inventory results. Conclusions The substantial variability in water footprint between systems indicates that generalisations about live- stock and livestock products should be avoided. However, many low input, predominantly non-irrigated, pasture- based livestock production systems have little impact on freshwater resources from consumptive water use, and the livestock have a water footprint similar to many broad-acre cereals. Globally, the majority of beef cattle are raised in non-irrigated mixed farming and grazing systems. There- fore, the general assertion that meat production is a driver of water scarcity is not supported. Keywords Agriculture . Environmental labelling . Livestock . Meat consumption . Water footprint . Water scarcity . Water stress . Water use 1 Introduction The development of methods to address water use is an important innovation occurring in life cycle assessment (LCA) (Berger and Finkbeiner 2010), currently supported by a project group working under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme and the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (UNEP– Responsible editor: Sarah McLaren B. G. Ridoutt (*) Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Sustainable Agriculture Flagship, Private Bag 10, Clayton South, Victoria 3169, Australia e-mail: brad.ridoutt@csiro.au P. Sanguansri CSIRO Food and Nutritional Sciences, Private Bag 16, Werribee, Victoria 3030, Australia M. Freer CSIRO Plant Industry, GPO Box 1600, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia G. S. Harper CSIRO Livestock Industries, Queensland Bioscience Precinct, 306 Carmody Road, St Lucia, Queensland 4067, Australia Int J Life Cycle Assess (2012) 17:165–175 DOI 10.1007/s11367-011-0346-y