Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39035455›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental science & policy2020

An integrative analytical model for the water-energy-food nexus: South Africa case study.

Luxon Nhamo, Tafadzwanashe Mabhaudhi, Sylvester Mpandeli, Chris Dickens, Charles Nhemachena, Aidan Senzanje, Dhesigen Naidoo, Stanley Liphadzi, Albert T Modi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental science & policy, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Progress in modeling dynamic systems for sustainable development.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Luxon NhamoWater Research Commission, Lynnwood Manor, Pretoria 0081, South Africa.
Tafadzwanashe MabhaudhiCentre for Transformative Agricultural and Food Systems, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Scottsville 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
Sylvester MpandeliWater Research Commission, Lynnwood Manor, Pretoria 0081, South Africa.
Chris DickensInternational Water Management Institute (IWMI), Pelawatte, Battaramulla, Colombo, Sri Lanka.
Charles NhemachenaAlliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), West End Towers, Nairobi, Kenya.
Aidan SenzanjeSchool of Engineering, University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN), Scottsville 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.
Dhesigen NaidooWater Research Commission, Lynnwood Manor, Pretoria 0081, South Africa.
Stanley LiphadziWater Research Commission, Lynnwood Manor, Pretoria 0081, South Africa.
Albert T ModiCentre for Transformative Agricultural and Food Systems, School of Agricultural, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Scottsville 3209, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 205200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The missing link between cross-sectoral resource management and full-scale adoption of the water-energy-food (WEF) nexus has been the lack of analytical tools that provide evidence for policy and decision-making. This study defined WEF nexus sustainability indicators, from where an analytical model was developed to manage WEF resources in an integrated manner using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The model established quantitative relationships among WEF sectors, simplifying the intricate interlinkages among resources, using South Africa as a case study. A spider graph was used to illustrate sector performance as related to others, whose management is viewed either as sustainable or unsustainable. The model was then applied to assess progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals in South Africa. The estimated integrated indices of 0.155 and 0.203 for 2015 and 2018, respectively, classify South Africa's management of resources as marginally sustainable. The model is a decision support tool that highlights priority areas for intervention.

Indexed as

AdaptationClimate changeComposite indicesLivelihoodsResilience

Identifiers

PMID39035455
PMCPMC7616264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.