Choosing the Right Tool - CEO Water Mandate

Several tools and methods have been developed to assist companies in their water assessment efforts. Each of these tools has its own strengths and weaknesses and intended objectives. The chart below shows a comparison of the similarities and differences of the tools in order to help companies select the tool most suited for their needs.

Comparing Corporate Water Assessment Tools

WFN Water Footprint	Life Cycle Assessment	WBCSD Global Water Tool	GEMI Water Sustainability Tools	WRI Aqueduct Tool

(click the titles below to expand the chart and learn more about these tools)

> Definition

WFN’s water footprint measures the total volume of freshwater used to produce the goods and services consumed by any well-defined group of consumers, including a family, municipality, province, state, nation, business, or organization.

A Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is the quantification of the environmental impacts of a given product or service caused or necessitated by its existence. LCA identifies the environmental impacts incurred at different stages in the value chain.

WBCSD’s online tool couples corporate water use, discharge, and facility information with watershed and country-level data. This allows companies to assess and communicate their water risks relative to water availability and access in their operations and supply chains.

GEMI’s online tools help organizations build a water strategy. They assess a company’s and its facilities’ relationships to water, identify risks, and describe the business case for action that addresses companies’ specific needs and circumstances.

Aqueduct is an online global database of local water risk indicators and a global standard for measuring and reporting geographic water risk. It assesses risk based on water supply and quality, regulatory pressure, governance, climate change, socio-economics, and many other factors.

> Scope / Boundaries

Water-specific – comprehensive measurement of corporate water use/discharge only

Emphasizes "evaporated water" (i.e. consumptive uses)

Assesses many environmental resources uses and emissions, including but not limited to water

Comprehensive measurement of water use and assessment of impacts

Measures consumptive and non-consumptive uses

Water-specific

Rough measurement of water use and efficiency

Determines relative water-related business risks

Provides information on countries and watersheds

Water-specific

Rough measurement of water use and assessment of key water impacts

Assess water-related business risks

Water-specific

Assess relative water-related business risks based on local water conditions

Provides detailed information on countries and watersheds

> General Strengths

Good tool for "big picture" strategic planning purposes

Easily understood by non-technical audiences

Best for water use assessments, as opposed to water quality

Well-suited for cross-media environmental assessments

Mature science-based methods for assessing water-quality impacts

Good first-tier risk screen

Inexpensive, fast, and does not require company expertise

Simple inventory for companies to compile their water data

Useful for companies just beginning to think about water stewardship

Inexpensive, fast, does not require expertise

Provides robust and granular measure of local water risk

Assesses water risk based on several measures in addition to physical water availability

> General Weaknesses

Generic, aggregated blue-green-grey WF figures are misleading

Grey WF deemed ineffective by many companies

No universally accepted method of assessing water use impacts

Results can be difficult to communicate to non-technical audiences

Does not address water quality/discharge-related risks

Does not address impacts

Assessments provide only rough estimates of risk

Rudimentary assessment of relative risks

No quantified results

“Deep-dive” river basin assessments are currently only available for the Yellow River, and will only expand to nine other basins in the near future