The Paradox of the Virtual Water Trade Balance in the Mediterranean Region
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Peri-Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
1.2. The Leontief Paradox and Water Consumption
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. The Classic Leontief Model and the Environmental Extension
2.2. The Regional I/O Model
2.3. Disaggregation Scheme
2.4. Virtual Water Content and Trade Patterns
Virtual Water Flows and the Leontief Paradox
2.5. Data
Sector | m3/t | Sector | m3/t |
---|---|---|---|
Cotton | 1808 | Tomato | 27 |
Wheat | 42 | Apple | 133 |
Maize | 81 | Pear | 94 |
Alfalfa | 27 | Peach | 188 |
Sector | m3/t | Sector | m3/t |
---|---|---|---|
Dairy cattle | 2056 | Goat | 32 |
Beef cattle | 630 | Pig | 520 |
Sheep | 68 |
2.6. Region under Study
3. Results
3.1. Total, Direct and Indirect Water Consumption in Thessaly
3.2. Virtual Water Flows in Thessaly Region
4. Discussion
The Water Paradox: Economic and Environmental Perspective
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Sojamo, S.; Keulertz, M.; Warner, J.; Allan, J.A. Virtual water hegemony: The role of agribusiness in global water governance. Water Int. 2012, 37, 169–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yano, S.; Hanasaki, N.; Itsubo, N.; Oki, T. Potential Impacts of Food Production on Freshwater Availability Considering Water Sources. Water 2016, 8, 163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ray, C.; McInnes, D.; Sanderson, M. Virtual water: Its implications on agriculture and trade. Water Int. 2018, 43, 717–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Proceedings of the Conference. Int. Rev. Red Cross 1993, 33, 368–376. [CrossRef]
- Allan, A.J. Virtual water: A strategic resource, global solutions to regional deficits. Groundwater 1998, 36, 545–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UNESCO. UN-Water, 2020: United Nations World Water Development Report 2020: Water and Climate Change; UNESCO: Paris, France, 2020; Available online: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372876.locale=en (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Yang, H.; Wang, L.; Abbaspour, K.C.; Zehnder, A.J.B. Virtual water trade: An assessment of water use efficiency in the international food trade. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2006, 10, 443–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Zhang, Y.; Zhang, J.-H.; Tian, Q.; Liu, Z.-H.; Zhang, H.-L. Virtual water trade of agricultural products: A new perspective to explore the Belt and Road. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 622-623, 988–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Llop, M. Economic impact of alternative water policy scenarios in the Spanish production system: An input–output analysis. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 68, 288–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brindha, K. Virtual water flows, water footprint and water savings from the trade of crop and livestock products of Germany. Water Environ. J. 2020, 34, 656–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chouchane, H.; Hoekstra, A.Y.; Krol, M.S.; Mekonnen, M.M. The water footprint of Tunisia from an economic perspective. Ecol. Indic. 2015, 52, 311–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dietzenbacher, E.; Velázquez, E. Analysing Andalusian Virtual Water Trade in an Input–Output Framework. Reg. Stud. 2007, 41, 185–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bae, J.; Dall’Erba, S. Crop Production, Export of Virtual Water and Water-saving Strategies in Arizona. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 146, 148–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mubako, S.; Lahiri, S.; Lant, C.L. Input–output analysis of virtual water transfers: Case study of California and Illinois. Ecol. Econ. 2013, 93, 230–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qasemipour, E.; Tarahomi, F.; Pahlow, M.; Sadati, S.S.M.; Abbasi, A. Assessment of Virtual Water Flows in Iran Using a Multi-Regional Input-Output Analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, W.; Adamowski, J.F.; Liu, C.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, X.; Su, H.; Cao, J.; Wang, L. The Impact of Virtual Water on Sustainable Development in Gansu Province. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Roson, R.; Sartori, M. Water Scarcity and Virtual Water Trade in the Mediterranean (September 27, 2010). IEFE Working Paper No. 38. Available online: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1683290 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1683290 (accessed on 8 September 2020).
- UNEP/MAP. Mediterranean Strategy for Sustainable Development 2016–2025; Plan Bleu, Regional Activity Centre: Valbonne, France, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Benis, K.; Ferrão, P. Potential mitigation of the environmental impacts of food systems through urban and peri-urban agriculture (UPA)—A life cycle assessment approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 140, 784–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Orlando, F.; Spigarolo, R.; Alali, S.; Bocchi, S. The role of public mass catering in local foodshed governance toward self-reliance of Metropolitan regions. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019, 44, 152–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camps-Calvet, M.; Langemeyer, J.; Calvet-Mir, L.; Gómez-Baggethun, E. Ecosystem services provided by urban gardens in Barcelona, Spain: Insights for policy and planning. Environ. Sci. Policy 2016, 62, 14–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Specht, K.; Siebert, R.; Thomaier, S.; Freisinger, U.B.; Sawicka, M.; Dierich, A.; Henckel, D.; Büsse, M. Zero-Acreage Farming in the City of Berlin: An Aggregated Stakeholder Perspective on Potential Benefits and Challenges. Sustainability 2015, 7, 4511–4523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Pölling, B.; Mergenthaler, M.; Lorleberg, W. Professional urban agriculture and its characteristic business models in Metropolis Ruhr, Germany. Land Use Policy 2016, 58, 366–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aubry, C.; Kebir, L. Shortening food supply chains: A means for maintaining agriculture close to urban areas? The case of the French metropolitan area of Paris. Food Policy 2013, 41, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- United Nations Brundtland Commission (1987) Our Common Future. Available online: http://www.un-documents.net/our-common-future.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- European Commission (2020) Sustainable Development. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/sustainable-development/ (accessed on 17 February 2020).
- Crenn, P.L. INRA—Urban Agriculture. 2014. Available online: http://www.sad.inra.fr/en/All-the-news/urban-agriculture (accessed on 12 February 2019).
- Tutuko, P.; Shen, Z. The Effect of Land Use Zonings on Housing Development: The Introduction of Cdl Approach in the Border Area of Surabaya and Sidoarjo Regency, Indonesia. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 227, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- World Bank. Urban agriculture Findings from Four City Case Studies, Urban Development Series. 2013. Available online: http://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/434431468331834592/pdf/807590NWP0UDS00Box0379817B00PUBLIC0.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Piorr, A.; Zasada, I.; Doernberg, A.; Zoll, F.; Ramme, W. Urban and Peri-Urban Agriculture in the EU. EU-AGRI Committee. 2018. Available online: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2018/617468/IPOL_STU(2018)617468_EN.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- van Veenhuizen, R. Profitability and Sustainability of Urban and Peri-Urban Agriuclture. FAO. 2007. Available online: www.fao.org/3/a-a1471e.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Riad, P.; Graefe, S.; Hussein, H.; Buerkert, A. Landscape transformation processes in two large and two small cities in Egypt and Jordan over the last five decades using remote sensing data. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2020, 197, 103766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, Z.; Cai, J.; Dunford, M.; Webster, D. Rethinking of the Relationship between Agriculture and the “Urban” Economy in Beijing: An Input-Output Approach. Technol. Econ. Dev. Econ. 2014, 20, 624–647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mattas, K.; Tsakiridou, E. Shedding fresh light on food industry’s role: The recession’s aftermath. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2010, 21, 212–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leontief, W. Domestic Production and Foreign Trade; The American Capital Position Re-Examined. Proc. Am. Philos. Soc. 1953, 97, 332–349. [Google Scholar]
- Leontief, W. Factor Proportions and the Structure of American Trade: Further Theoretical and Empirical Analysis. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1956, 38, 386–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lampiris, G.; Karelakis, C.; Loizou, E. Evaluation of the impacts of CAP policy measures on a local economy: The case of a Greek region. Land Use Policy 2018, 77, 745–751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Loizou, E.; Karelakis, C.; Galanopoulos, K.; Mattas, K. The role of agriculture as a development tool for a regional economy. Agric. Syst. 2019, 173, 482–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X.; Chen, B.; Yang, Z. National water footprint in an input–output framework—A case study of China 2002. Ecol. Model. 2009, 220, 245–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leontief, W.W. Quantitative Input and Output Relations in the Economic Systems of the United States. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1936, 18, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Leontief, W. The Structure of American Economy; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1941. [Google Scholar]
- Miller, R.E.; Blair, P.D. Input-Output Analysis: Foundations and Extensions; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Leontief, W. Environmental Repercussions and the Economic Structure: An Input-Output Approach. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1970, 52, 262–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, R.C.; Mandeville, T.D.; Karunaratne, N.D. Regional Economic Planning: Generation of Regional Input-Output Analysis; Croom Helm: London, UK, 1979. [Google Scholar]
- Mattas, K.; Loizou, S.; Tzouvelekas, V.; Tsakiri, M.; Bonfiglio, A. Deriving Regional I-O Tables and Multipliers. In Rural Balkans and EU Integration: An Input-Output Approach; Bonfiglio, A., Esposti, R., Sottile, F., Eds.; Franco Angeli: Milan, Italy, 2006; pp. 75–120. [Google Scholar]
- Flegg, A.T.; Webber, C.D.; Elliott, M.V. On the Appropriate Use of Location Quotients in Generating Regional Input–Output Tables. Reg. Stud. 1995, 29, 547–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lampiris, G.; Karelakis, C.; Loizou, E. Comparison of non-survey techniques for constructing regional input–output tables. Ann. Oper. Res. 2020, 294, 225–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wolsky, A.M. Disaggregating Input-Output Models. Rev. Econ. Stat. 1984, 66, 283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lenzen, M. Aggregation versus disaggregation in input–output analysis of the environment. Econ. Syst. Res. 2011, 23, 73–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lindner, S.; Legault, J.; Guan, D. Disaggregating input–output models with incomplete information. Econ. Syst. Res. 2012, 24, 329–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rivera, N.M. Disaggregation of sectors in social accounting matrices using a customized Wolsky method: A comment on its estimation bias. Appl. Econ. Lett. 2015, 23, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN. Handbook of Input-Output Table Compilation and Analysis; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- ELSTAT. Hellenic Statistical Authority: Supply and Use Table, Symmetric Input-Output Table/2015. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/statistics/-/publication/SEL38/2015 (accessed on 22 September 2020).
- ELSTAT. Hellenic Statistical Authority: Agriculture, Livestock, Fishery. 2020. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/statistics/agr (accessed on 8 September 2020).
- ELSTAT. Hellenic Statistical Authority: National Accounts. 2020. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/statistics/-/publication/SPG06/2015 (accessed on 8 September 2020).
- Chiu, C.C.; Shiang, W.-J.; Lin, C.J. The Water Footprint of Bioethanol. J. Clean Energy Technol. 2015, 4, 43–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mekonnen, M.M.; Hoekstra, A.Y. The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2011, 15, 1577–1600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Evangelou, E.; Tsadilas, C.; Tserlikakis, N.; Tsitouras, A.; Kyritsis, A. Water Footprint of Industrial Tomato Cultivations in the Pinios River Basin: Soil Properties Interactions. Water 2016, 8, 515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mekonnen, M.M.; Hoekstra, A.Y. A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2010, 14, 1259–1276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Mekonnen, M.M.; Hoekstra, A.Y. The Green, Blue and Grey Water Footprint of Farm Animals and Animal Products; Value of Water Research Report Series No. 48; UNESCO-IHE: Delft, The Netherlands, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Eurostat. Water Use by Supply Category and Economical Sector. 2020. Available online: https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_wat_cat&lang=en (accessed on 22 September 2020).
- Eurostat. Water Use in the Manufacturing Industry by Activity and Supply Category. 2020. Available online: https://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=env_wat_ind&lang=en (accessed on 22 September 2020).
- Government Gazette. Action Plan for the Thessalian Field that has been Characterized as a Vulnerable Zone by Nitrate Pollution of Agricultural Origin According to Article 2 of 19652/1906/1999 of Joint Ministerial Decision (Government Gazette 1575/B ’). 2001. Available online: http://www.minagric.gr/images/stories/docs/agrotis/XOROTAJIA/4_thessaliko_pedio.pdf (accessed on 10 February 2021).
- Ministry of Environment and Energy. Management plan of the River Basins of Thessalia River Basin District; Ministry of Environment and Energy: Athens, Greece, 2017. Available online: http://wfdver.ypeka.gr/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/EL08_SDLAP_APPROVED.pdf (accessed on 8 September 2020).
- ELSTAT. Hellenic Statistical Authority: Areas and Production. Available online: https://www.statistics.gr/en/statistics/eco (accessed on 8 September 2020).
Basin | Basin Surface (km2) | Resources (Million m3 per year) | |
---|---|---|---|
Surface | Subterranean | ||
Pinios | 11,062 | 473.15 | 818.45 |
Almyros-Pelion | 2078 | 25.6 | 104.5 |
Total | 13,140 | 498.75 | 922.95 |
Crops | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
in ha | Total Crop Land | Arables | Garden Area | Trees | Vines |
Cultivated land | 437,681 | 346,667.7 | 7404.1 | 56,820.4 | 105.2 |
Irrigated land | 190,875.8 | 154,922.3 | 7385.5 | 24,573.1 | 3994.9 |
Crop | Areas (in ha) | Production (in tons) |
---|---|---|
Cotton | 86,746.5 | 307,360.34 |
Maize | 23,357.6 | 286,838.3 |
Durum wheat | 87,384.6 | 302,594.7 |
Alfalfa | 25,971.1 | 309,965.3 |
Tomato | 1112.3 | 60,026.3 |
Pear | 2212.1 | 57,992 |
Apple | 2935.3 | 60,938.4 |
Peach | 2563.2 | 69,463.2 |
Sector (Rank in Parenthesis) | Total Water Consumption | Direct | Indirect |
---|---|---|---|
Cotton | 2.012 (4) | 1.609 (4) | 0.403 (4) |
Maize | 0.515 (8) | 0.367 (8) | 0.148 (7) |
Durum wheat | 0.966 (5) | 0.740 (5) | 0.226 (6) |
Alfalfa | 0.189 (12) | 0.142 (11) | 0.047 (12) |
Tomato | 0.006 (17) | 0.004 (16) | 0.002 (21) |
Pear | 0.027 (14) | 0.023 (14) | 0.004 (15) |
Apple | 0.107 (13) | 0.083 (13) | 0.024 (13) |
Peach | 0.367 (9) | 0.253 (9) | 0.114 (10) |
Cattle | 3.078 (1) | 2.055 (1) | 1.023 (3) |
Pigs | 3.014 (2) | 1.828 (2) | 1.186 (1) |
Sheep and Goats | 2.844 (3) | 1.735 (3) | 1.109 (2) |
Other Agriculture | 0.684 (6) | 0.410 (7) | 0.274 (5) |
Products of forestry and related services | 6.80 × 10−1 (7) | 5.49 × 10−1 (6) | 1.31 × 10−1 (8) |
Fish and fisheries | 3.06 × 10−1 (10) | 1.92 × 10−1 (10) | 1.14 × 10−1 (9) |
Mining and quarrying | 4.40 × 10−3 (19) | 2.70 × 10−3 (19) | 1.70 × 10−3 (18) |
Food, beverage and tobacco products | 4.94 × 10−3 (18) | 2.70 × 10−3 (18) | 2.24 × 10−3 (17) |
Textiles, Clothing and leather products | 1.73 × 10−3 (23) | 6.09 × 10−4 (23) | 1.12 × 10−3 (22) |
Wood, paper, printing | 1.43 × 10−2 (15) | 7.59 × 10−3 (15) | 6.75 × 10−3 (14) |
Petroleum, chemicals, pharmaceuticals | 3.60 × 10−3 (20) | 1.94 × 10−3 (21) | 1.66 × 10−3 (19) |
Rubber and other non-metallic products | 2.78 × 10−3 (21) | 1.39 × 10−3 (22) | 1.40 × 10−3 (20) |
Metal products | 2.78 × 10−3 (22) | 1.97 × 10−3 (20) | 8.09 × 10−4 (23) |
Electric, electronical and other equipment | 3.84 × 10−5 (36) | 2.12 × 10−5 (36) | 1.73 × 10−5 (33) |
Motors and transport equipment | 8.85 × 10−4 (24) | 5.53 × 10−4 (25) | 3.32 × 10−4 (24) |
Furniture; other manufactured goods | 7.57 × 10−3 (16) | 4.02 × 10−3 (17) | 3.54 × 10−3 (16) |
Repair and installation services of machinery and equipment | 5.65 × 10−4 (26) | 3.97 × 10−4 (26) | 1.67 × 10−4 (26) |
Electricity and related activities | 2.10 × 10−1 (11) | 1.37 × 10−1 (12) | 7.25 × 10−2 (11) |
Water supply and Sewage | 5.54 × 10−5 (33) | 4.48 × 10−5 (33) | 1.06 × 10−5 (37) |
Construction | 8.76 × 10−4 (25) | 5.73 × 10−4 (24) | 3.04 × 10−4 (25) |
Trade | 1.48E × 10−4 (29) | 9.88 × 10−5 (29) | 4.91 × 10−5 (28) |
Transport, warehouse, postal services | 4.76 × 10−5 (34) | 2.58 × 10−5 (35) | 2.18 × 10−5 (32) |
Accommodation and food services | 2.18 × 10−4 (27) | 1.32 × 10−4 (28) | 8.66 × 10−5 (27) |
Telecommunications, Publishing, Motion picture, Computer services | 3.13 × 10−5 (37) | 1.86 × 10−5 (37) | 1.27 × 10−5 (35) |
Finance and Insurance | 1.32 × 10−5 (39) | 8.88 × 10−6 (40) | 4.29 × 10−6 (38) |
Real estate activities and imputed rents | 3.34 × 10−6 (41) | 3.17 × 10−6 (41) | 1.66 × 10−7 (41) |
Legal, Architectural and other scientific services | 3.95 × 10−5 (35) | 2.70 × 10−5 (34) | 1.25 × 10−5 (36) |
Rental, employment, travel, security services | 3.06 × 10−5 (38) | 1.74 × 10−5 (38) | 1.32 × 10−5 (34) |
Public administration and defense services | 1.22 × 10−5 (40) | 9.91 × 10−6 (39) | 2.32 × 10−6 (40) |
Education services | 5.92 × 10−5 (32) | 5.63 × 10−5 (32) | 2.87 × 10−6 (39) |
Health and Social services | 2.06 × 10−4 (28) | 1.57 × 10−4 (27) | 4.90 × 10−5 (29) |
Trade Balance (mil EUR) | VWT (mil m3) | VWE (mil m3) | VWI (mil m3) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Cotton | −72.013 | −127.406 | 71.754 | 199.161 |
Maize | −9.535 | −4.066 | 2.977 | 7.043 |
Durum wheat | −28.044 | −23.774 | 13.049 | 36.823 |
Alfalfa | −7.794 | −2.643 | 2.533 | 5176.129 |
Tomato | −74.751 | −0.655 | 0.473 | 1127.694 |
Pear | −61.456 | −1.655 | 0.737 | 2391.573 |
Apple | −20.632 | −2.016 | 1.072 | 3087.748 |
Peach | −6.516 | −1.949 | 1.700 | 3649.498 |
Cattle | −9.918 | −22.963 | 15.702 | 38.665 |
Pigs | −2.696 | −5.542 | 6.371 | 11.913 |
Sheep and Goats | −3.268 | −6.495 | 11.508 | 18.004 |
Other Agriculture | −4.478 | −2.877 | 18.414 | 21.291 |
Products of forestry and related services | −5.777 | −3.389 | 0.916 | 4305.511 |
Fish and fisheries | −0.383 | −0.082 | 0.003 | 8562.036 |
Mining and quarrying | −426.448 | −4.708 | 2.700 | 7407.878 |
Food, beverage and tobacco products | −174.002 | −9.556 | 8.819 | 18.374 |
Textiles, Clothing and leather products | −16.774 | −0.326 | 0.252 | 5780.714 |
Wood, paper, printing | −43.402 | −0.697 | 0.171 | 8681.037 |
Petroleum, chemicals, pharmaceuticals | −502.349 | −10.259 | 7.904 | 18.163 |
Rubber and other non-metallic products | −33.266 | −0.360 | 0.245 | 604.654 |
Metal products | −120.824 | −1.344 | 1.309 | 2653.115 |
Electric, electronical and other equipment | −94.626 | −0.366 | 0.252 | 6182.943 |
Motors and transport equipment | −212.415 | −0.345 | 0.176 | 5201.370 |
Furniture; other manufactured goods | −35.344 | −0.198 | 0.045 | 2424.036 |
Repair and installation services of machinery and equipment | −1.994 | −0.068 | 0.059 | 1277.405 |
Electricity and related activities | −6.456 | −1.048 | 0.119 | 1167.205 |
Water supply and Sewage | −68.541 | −1.897 | 1.690 | 3587.497 |
Construction | −147.259 | −0.270 | 0.185 | 4552.762 |
Trade | −217.132 | −5.642 | 4.949 | 10.591 |
Transport, warehouse, postal services | −73.118 | −0.539 | 0.461 | 1.000 |
Accommodation and food services | −69.109 | −0.046 | 0.030 | 7663.837 |
Telecommunications, Publishing, Motion picture, Computer services | −5.761 | −0.068 | 0.056 | 123.738 |
Finance and Insurance | −55.064 | −1.780 | 1.569 | 3348.735 |
Real estate activities and imputed rents | −288.602 | −1.511 | 1.263 | 2.774 |
Legal, Architectural and other scientific services | −40.734 | −0.873 | 0.746 | 1618.675 |
Rental, employment, travel, security services | −10.502 | −0.113 | 0.090 | 2026.722 |
Public administration and defense services | −71.966 | −0.001 | 0.000 | 7130.487 |
Education services | −18.150 | −0.031 | 0.022 | 5292.727 |
Health and Social services | −105.816 | −0.156 | 0.123 | 8083.404 |
Total | −3146.916 | −247.718 | 180.442 | 113,492.933 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Gkatsikos, A.; Mattas, K. The Paradox of the Virtual Water Trade Balance in the Mediterranean Region. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052978
Gkatsikos A, Mattas K. The Paradox of the Virtual Water Trade Balance in the Mediterranean Region. Sustainability. 2021; 13(5):2978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052978
Chicago/Turabian StyleGkatsikos, Alexandros, and Konstadinos Mattas. 2021. "The Paradox of the Virtual Water Trade Balance in the Mediterranean Region" Sustainability 13, no. 5: 2978. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052978