ArticlePDF Available

Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology in the face of global change

  • Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Germany
Model-based assessment
of European water resources and hydrology
in the face of global change
Bernhard Lehner, Thomas Henrichs, Petra Döll, Joseph Alcamo
Center for Environmental Systems Research
University of Kassel
December 2001
The Kassel World Water Series:
Report No 1 – A Digital Global Map of Irrigated Areas
Report No 2 – World Water in 2025
Report No 3 – Water Use in Semi-Arid North-Eastern Brazil
Report No 4 – A Digital Global Map of Irrigated Areas (Update)
Report No 5 – EuroWasser
Model-based assessment of European water resources
and hydrology in the face of global change.
Kassel World Water Series. Report Number 5
Report A0104, December 2001
Center for Environmental Systems Research,
University of Kassel, 34109 Kassel, Germany
Tel. 0561 804 3266, Fax.0561 804 3176
Please cite as:
“Lehner, B., Henrichs, T., Döll, P., Alcamo, J. (2001): EuroWasser – Model-based assessment of European water
resources and hydrology in the face of global change. Kassel World Water Series 5, Center for Environmental
Systems Research, University of Kassel, Kurt-Wolters-Strasse 3, 34109 Kassel, Germany.”
EuroWasser – Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology in the face of global change
Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology
in the face of global change
Bernhard Lehner, Thomas Henrichs, Petra Döll, Joseph Alcamo
Executive Summary
In this report we assess the possible impact of climate change on Europe’s water resources. We also
include the complicating factor of growing water withdrawals and their influence on water stress.
Since there is no standard yardstick to measure these impacts, we use the concept of “critical
regions”, meaning regions where the extent of changes to water resources (according to different
measures) is larger than in other European regions. The thinking behind this concept is that the
regions facing the most rapid changes (in the direction of higher risk) may have to devise the most
drastic adaptation measures. Conversely, regions with slower changes may be able to gradually, and
without special effort, adapt to the changes in their water resources.
As the basic spatial unit of our analysis we take the river basin and grid cell because water
withdrawals, availability, or drought and flood frequencies cannot, in our opinion, be meaningfully
averaged over larger scales like countries. Within each of the approximately 550 first order river
basins and 6500 grid cells making up Europe, we estimate several measures of changes in water
resources because it is unclear which measure is best suited for assessing impacts on society and
ecosystems. Indeed, an urgent task for the research community is to identify relevant and measurable
indicators of impact. This task requires multi-disciplinary studies of the vulnerability of society to
changes in water resources, and such studies must in particular include social scientists who up to
now have played only a small role in water resource studies. Despite the challenge of this task, it
needs to be done.
As one measure of changes in water resources we examine the change in “water stress” –
here taken as an indicator of the pressure put on water resources by water withdrawals. We show that
today’s severe water stress regions in Europe include not only expected areas such as arid Southern
Europe, but also heavily populated watersheds of North-Western and South-Eastern Europe because
of their high water withdrawals. Under future changes in population, economy, and climate change
we shown that Eastern Europe will be an especially critical region for water stress because of the
sharp increase in water withdrawals for households and industry, but also because of climate-related
decreases in water availability. As compared to other regions, the pressure on aquatic ecosystems may
increase faster, and the competition between water users may be greater. The need for intensive river
basin management is likely to increase.
Another measure of change is the change in the frequency of drought. The critical drought
regions (defined as a decrease in the return period of the current 100-year drought to 50 years or less)
include much of Southern Europe and parts of Central Europe. In these calculations the increase in
water consumption in the domestic and industry sectors again play an important role, especially in
South-Eastern Europe. During periodic dry spells, this water consumption will deplete river discharge
to a level below a critical reference flow. Drought planning in these critical regions may need to be
revised in the light of these impacts and additional adaptive measures may be needed.
Consolidating the results for water stress and drought frequencies, South-Eastern Europe
might be the area with the greatest increase in pressure on its water resources in the coming decades.
Here large areas fall under the critical regions definition regarding both water stress and drought
frequencies, in total accounting for about a quarter of Europe’s land area. This region might require
the highest degree of adaptive measures to ensure adequate water supply and protection of aquatic
Future changes in the occurrence of low flows and droughts may also affect the output of
hydroelectric power plants. To address this issue we compute both an indirect measure of this impact,
namely the change in the gross hydropower potential (i.e. the potential if all runoff at all locations
were to be transformed into energy) and a more realistic measure, namely the developed hydropower
potential of current hydroelectric facilities. For the latter analysis we assume that most of Europe’s
future hydroelectricity will be generated at current hydroelectric sites because they are already good
sites, and because it is difficult to develop new sites in Europe. Under these assumptions, the critical
regions (defined as where the developed potential of hydroelectric facilities will drop by 25% or more)
EuroWasser – Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology in the face of global change
will be similar to the critical regions for droughts of Southern and South-Eastern Europe noted above.
But not all countries are equally affected because some are more reliant on hydroelectricity than
others. Of the 40 European countries investigated, 14 will experience a decline of more than 25% in
developed hydropower potential. Nine of these countries are in Eastern Europe and they may be
particularly affected by the decrease in hydroelectric potential because they are undergoing a rapid
increase in the demand for electricity.
Although we emphasize the negative impacts of climate change, it is also notable that 15% of
Europe will have decreasing water stress under the long-term scenario investigated in this study.
Where water stress decreases, water quality may improve (depending on the degree of wastewater
treatment and many other factors), and aquatic ecosystems and biodiversity may recover. Also,
according to this scenario, the current 100-year drought will occur less frequently in approximately
half of Europe’s land area, implying less frequent water shortages. In addition, the potential for
generating hydroelectricity will increase in about the same areas, along with its evident economic
benefits.But the above benefits have an important caveat – although increasing precipitation could
bring positive effects, it could also bring more intense and frequent floods. Critical flood regions
(defined as a decrease in the return period of the current 100-year flood to 50 years or less) include
much of Northern Europe, and smaller parts of Central and Southern Europe. These regions cover
many of the same areas that may benefit from decreased occurrence of drought. Here new strategies
may be needed to prevent an increase in damaging river flooding. Preliminary modeling results
indicate that some parts of Southern and Central Europe may even be in a special category where
both droughts and floods become more frequent, e.g. the Wisla basin in Poland. This may be due to a
change in the seasonal variability of precipitation and temperature in these areas, but the results are
still very preliminary.
Finally, we compare critical flood regions with critical drought regions. Here the two sides of
the climate change coin become evident. Critical regions of either floods or droughts (or both) cover a
total of two-thirds of Europe’s land area. This result suggests that adaptation to more frequent
extreme climatic events should be a major concern of European water resources management.
But what should the adaptation measures be? The long list of possibilities can be clustered
into two categories: “demand side” measures that aim to reduce exposure to the impacts of climate
change, and “supply side” measures in which actions are taken to directly counteract these impacts.
An example of a demand side measure is the reduction of water use through conservation or through
changes in lifestyle or economic activity, which reduces the dependence of society on large volumes of
water during periodic water shortages. Another demand side measure is reducing society’s exposure
to flooding by prohibiting development in flood plains.
An example of a supply side measure is counteracting more frequent or intense droughts by
improving reservoir management or altering water distribution systems. Another supply side example
is adapting to more frequent floods by creating natural inundation areas or by building dikes. These
are just a few of the many adaptive measures available to European water managers in the face of
increasing impacts of climate change.
The selection of these measures will depend on the type of new risks, the current adaptive
measures being taken, the costs of new measures, the availability of land, and many other factors.
Since these and other factors are mainly specific to the country and river basin, it is appropriate to
evaluate these measures on these scales.
Yet although action should be taken on the national and river basin level, some intervention is
also justified on the European Union level because of the large total European area that may
experience either more frequent droughts or floods. It is also consistent with the findings of this study
that droughts or floods could occur more often in different parts of Europe within a relatively short
time of each other – Among other impacts, this could lead to the overtaxing of European emergency
relief services. It is also conceivable that the financial burdens of dealing with two catastrophes within
a short time span could lead to cascading financial problems between the tightly-knit economies of
Europe. In any event, we recommend that the European Union review the adequacy of its planning for
coping with water-related catastrophes in the face of climate change.
In conclusion, this study shows that climate change will have mixed positive and negative
effects on water resources in different parts of Europe, but that we should be especially alert to where
it may cause new risks and require new adaptive strategies.
EuroWasser – Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology in the face of global change
Table of Contents
1INTRODUCTION _______________________________________________________________ 1-1
2THE GLOBAL INTEGRATED WATER MODEL WATERGAP 2.1 _______________________ 2-1
2.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 2-1
2.2 MODEL DESCRIPTION__________________________________________________________ 2-2
2.2.1 Spatial base data__________________________________________________________ 2-3
2.2.2 Climate input ____________________________________________________________ 2-3
2.2.3 The Global Water Use Model ________________________________________________ 2-4
2.2.4 Global Hydrology Model____________________________________________________ 2-8
2.3 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 2-17
2.4 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 2-18
STUDY FOR THE ELBE AND ODER BASINS________________________________________ 3-1
3.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 3-1
3.2 OVERVIEW OF THE APPLIED MODELS______________________________________________ 3-2
3.2.1 WaterGAP (GhK) _________________________________________________________ 3-2
3.2.2 ARC/EGMO (PIK)_________________________________________________________ 3-3
3.2.3 GESIMA/SEWAB (GKSS) ___________________________________________________ 3-3
3.3 RESULTS____________________________________________________________________ 3-3
3.3.1 Spatial and temporal model comparisons _______________________________________ 3-4
3.3.2 Macroscale modeling using mesoscale precipitation data ___________________________ 3-9
3.4 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 3-10
3.5 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 3-11
4.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 4-1
4.2 THE BASELINE-A SCENARIO ____________________________________________________ 4-2
4.3 CLIMATE CHANGE ____________________________________________________________ 4-2
4.4 SOCIO-ECONOMIC DRIVING FORCES _______________________________________________ 4-4
4.4.1 Population ______________________________________________________________ 4-5
4.4.2 Income _________________________________________________________________ 4-6
4.4.3 Electricity Production______________________________________________________ 4-6
4.4.4 Irrigated Areas ___________________________________________________________ 4-7
4.4.5 Structural Change_________________________________________________________ 4-7
4.4.6 Technological Change______________________________________________________ 4-8
4.5 CONCLUSIONS _______________________________________________________________ 4-8
4.6 REFERENCES ________________________________________________________________ 4-8
5EUROPE’S WATER STRESS TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE___________________________ 5-1
5.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 5-1
5.2 EUROPES WATER STRESS TODAY_________________________________________________ 5-2
5.2.1 Water availability _________________________________________________________ 5-2
5.2.2 Water withdrawals ________________________________________________________ 5-3
5.2.3 Water stress______________________________________________________________ 5-3
5.3 EUROPES WATER STRESS IN THE FUTURE __________________________________________ 5-4
5.3.1 Water availability _________________________________________________________ 5-4
5.3.2 Water withdrawals ________________________________________________________ 5-6
5.3.3 Water stress______________________________________________________________ 5-7
5.4 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 5-10
5.5 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 5-11
EuroWasser – Model-based assessment of European water resources and hydrology in the face of global change
6EUROPE’S FLOODS TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE__________________________________ 6-1
6.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 6-1
6.2 METHODOLOGY______________________________________________________________ 6-2
6.2.1 General overview of flood and flood frequency calculations _________________________ 6-2
6.2.2 Data limitations __________________________________________________________ 6-3
6.2.3 The WaterGAP 2.1 model ___________________________________________________ 6-4
6.2.4 Flood calculations with WaterGAP ____________________________________________ 6-5
6.2.5 Evaluation of WaterGAP regarding flood assessments _____________________________ 6-6
6.3 RESULTS____________________________________________________________________ 6-9
6.4 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 6-14
6.5 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 6-15
7EUROPE’S DROUGHTS TODAY AND IN THE FUTURE ______________________________ 7-1
7.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 7-1
7.2 METHODOLOGY______________________________________________________________ 7-2
7.2.1 General overview of low flow and drought calculations_____________________________ 7-2
7.2.2 The WaterGAP 2.1 model ___________________________________________________ 7-4
7.2.3 Drought calculations with WaterGAP __________________________________________ 7-5
7.2.4 Evaluation of WaterGAP regarding drought assessments____________________________ 7-6
7.3 RESULTS___________________________________________________________________ 7-10
7.4 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 7-15
7.5 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 7-16
8.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 8-1
8.2.1 Classification of hydroelectric power stations____________________________________ 8-3
8.2.2 Today’s hydropower utilization in Europe_______________________________________ 8-3
8.2.3 Perspectives of hydropower development independent from climate change______________ 8-4
8.3 GENERAL METHODOLOGY ______________________________________________________ 8-5
8.3.1 Types of hydropower potentials_______________________________________________ 8-5
8.3.2 The WaterGAP 2.1 model ___________________________________________________ 8-6
8.4 GROSS HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL ________________________________________________ 8-7
8.4.1 Methodology_____________________________________________________________ 8-7
8.4.2 Calculation of the gross hydropower potential with WaterGAP _______________________ 8-8
8.4.3 Results _________________________________________________________________ 8-8
8.5 DEVELOPED HYDROPOWER POTENTIAL ___________________________________________ 8-10
8.5.1 Methodology____________________________________________________________ 8-10
8.5.2 Calculation of the developed hydropower potential with WaterGAP___________________ 8-11
8.5.3 Results ________________________________________________________________ 8-12
8.6 CONCLUSIONS ______________________________________________________________ 8-16
8.7 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 8-18
IMPACTS ON EUROPE’S WATER RESOURCES _____________________________________ 9-1
9.1 INTRODUCTION ______________________________________________________________ 9-1
9.2 WHAT IS THE APPROACH OF THE PROJECT?_________________________________________ 9-2
9.4 HOW WILL WATER STRESS CHANGE IN THE FUTURE?__________________________________ 9-5
9.4.1 Changes in water withdrawals________________________________________________ 9-5
9.4.2 Changes in water availability ________________________________________________ 9-6
9.4.3 Changes in water stress_____________________________________________________ 9-7
9.5 WILL DROUGHTS OCCUR MORE OFTEN?____________________________________________ 9-8
9.7 WILL FLOODS BECOME MORE FREQUENT?_________________________________________ 9-11
9.8 UNCERTAINTIES AND FUTURE WORK_____________________________________________ 9-12
9.9 FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS _____________________________________ 9-13
9.10 REFERENCES _______________________________________________________________ 9-17
... Especially for Eastern Europe, the increased water consumption for economic development is also a significant factor affecting river regimes [14]. Increases in water consumption may even be of the same magnitude as the projected impact of climate change [35]. Meanwhile, according to Cammalleri et al. [36], the projected increases in water demand may play a more critical role in the future than climate change in continental subregions of Europe. ...
Full-text available
This paper presents changes in the flow of 14 rivers located in the Warta River basin, recorded from 1951 to 2020. The Warta is the third-longest river in Poland. Unfortunately, the Warta River catchment area is one of the most water-scarce regions. It hosts about 150 hydropower plants with a capacity of up to 5 kW. The catchment areas of the 14 smaller rivers selected for the study differ in location, size, land cover structure and geological structure. The paper is the first study of this type with respect to both the number of analyzed catchments, the length of the sampling series and the number of analyzed flow characteristics in this part of Europe. The analysis of changes in the river flows was performed with reference to low minimum, mean and maximum monthly, seasonal and annual flows. Particular attention was paid to 1, 3, 7, 30 and 90-day low flows and durations of the flows between Q50 and Q90%. In addition, the duration of flows between Q50 and Q90% were analysed. Analysis of the direction and extent of particular flow types was performed by multitemporal analysis using the Mann–Kendall (MK) and Sen (S) tests. The analysis of multiannual flow sequences from the years 1951–2020 showed that the changes varied over the time periods and catchments. The most significant changes occurred in the low flows, while the least significant changes occurred in the high flows. From the point of view of the operation of the hydropower sector, these changes may be unfavourable and result in a reduction in the efficiency of run-of-river hydropower plants. It was established that local factors play a dominant role in the shaping of river flows in both positive and negative terms, for the efficiency of the hydropower plants.
... The proposed Nash and Sutcliffe [61] efficiency was computed, as is shown below: ...
Sustainable agriculture in arid regions necessitates that the quality of groundwater be carefully monitored; otherwise, low-quality irrigation water may cause soil degradation and negatively impact crop productivity. This study aimed to evaluate the quality of groundwater samples collected from the wells in the quaternary aquifer, which are located in the Western Desert (WD) and the Central Nile Delta (CND), by integrating a multivariate analysis, proximal remote sensing data, and data-driven modeling (adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS) and support vector machine regression (SVMR)). Data on the physiochemical parameters were subjected to multi-variate analysis to ease the interpretation of groundwater quality. Then, six irrigation water quality indices (IWQIs) were calculated, and the original spectral reflectance (OSR) of groundwater samples were collected in the 302-1148 nm range, with the optimal spectral wavelength intervals corresponding to each of the six IWQIs determined through correlation coefficients (r). Finally, the performance of both the ANFIS and SVMR models for evaluating the IWQIs was investigated based on effective spectral reflectance bands. From the multivariate analysis, it was concluded that the combination of factor analysis and principal component analysis was found to be advantageous to examining and interpreting the behavior of groundwater quality in both regions, as well as predicting the variables that may impact groundwater quality by illuminating the relationship between physiochemical parameters and the factors or components of both analyses. The analysis of the six IWQIs revealed that the majority of groundwater samples from the CND were highly suitable for irrigation purposes, whereas most of the groundwater from the WD can be used with some limitations to avoid salinity and alkalinity issues in the long term. The high r values between the six IWQIs and OSR were located at wavelength intervals of 302-318, 358-900, and 1074-1148 nm, and the peak value of r for these was relatively flat. Finally, the ANFIS and SVMR both obtained satisfactory degrees of model accuracy for evaluating the IWQIs, but the ANFIS model (R 2 = 0.74-1.0) was superior to the SVMR (R 2 = 0.01-0.88) in both the training and testing series. Finally, the multivariate analysis was able to easily interpret groundwater quality and ground-based remote sensing on the basis of spectral reflectance bands via the ANFIS model, which could be used as a fast and low-cost onsite tool to estimate the IWQIs of groundwater. Citation: Khadr, M.; Gad, M.; El-Hendawy, S.; Al-Suhaibani, N.; Dewir, Y.H.; Tahir, M.U.; Mubushar, M.; Elsayed, S. The Integration of Multivariate Statistical Approaches, Hyperspectral Reflectance, and Data-Driven Modeling for Assessing the Quality and Suitability of Groundwater for Irrigation. Water 2021, 13, 35.
... Aküzüm et al. [4] pointed out that the need for water increases with the increase of population and technology; therefore, water ecosystems' pollution increases, and now it is necessary to develop new water resources. From the climatic models, it has been observed that most countries may experience water shortage in 2030, and severe water shortage may occur for half of them Lehner et al. [5], Konukcu et al. [6], Öktem [7]. Helmreich and Horn [8] explained that water scarcity is a problem for many developing countries, rainwater is a potential source of drinking water according to the intensity of rainfall, and rainwater collection system can supply water suitable for agriculture and domestic use. ...
... Izstrādātie Eiropas klimata izmaiņu modeļi parāda, ka dažos reģionos, jo īpaši Eiropas centrālajā, ziemeļu un ziemeļaustrumu daļā, ikgadējais nokrišņu daudzums pieaugs par 1-2% katru desmitgadi (Impacts of Europe's changing climate, 2004), virszemes noteces apjoms pieaugs par 10-50% laika posmā līdz 2070. gadam (Lehner et al., 2001) Pētītajos ezeros 2005. gadā tika konstatēti 69 aļģu taksoni, kas pieder šādiem aļģu nodalījumiem: 11 -zilaļģes Cyanophyta , 1 -kriptofītaļģes Cryptophyta, 2hrizofītaļģes Chrysophyta , 2 -dinofītaļģes Dinophyta , 4 -eiglēnaļģes Euglenophyta, 15 -kramaļģes Bacillariophyta, 33 -zaļaļģes Chlorophyta, kā arī hlorofilu saturošie vicaiņi Flagellata. ...
... Climate change reports forecast considerably reduced availabilities for many South European river basins. The EuroWasser model [102] has forecasted the impact of climate change on water availability in Europe according to two different Global Circulation Models for the time horizons 2020s and 2070s. Their calculations indicated, river basins will have heavily reduced water availability. ...
... In order to monitor and characterize droughts, the development of reliable and quantitative drought indices are important (Zargar et al. 2011). The effect of flood is an immediate action, whereas, the occurrence of drought has creeping and steadily growing nature (Lehner et al. 2001). ...
Full-text available
The Upper Blue Nile region in Ethiopia, frequently affected by drought conditions and much of its water flows from highland regions to territorial countries. Hence to characterize, monitor and forecast drought, an advanced drought index which considers the combination of different climatic conditions in this region is required. The main objective of this article is to develop new drought indices by considering with and without climate signal contribution which is precious in decision making of policy makers and scientific community. In order to estimate the quality and performance of the developed indices we implemented statistical methods of RMSE, MAE and bias with the existing index of SPI across different time scales. Infact we developed two drought indices by considering SST into the meteorological variables (MVDIstS) and without considering SST (MVDIst0). Both drought indices show drought severity, larger duration than that of SPI.
... As a consequence, a drop of around 11% in the Euphrates River discharge is expected. Lehner et al. (2001) and EEA (2004) also estimated around 10 to 25% reduction in river runoff in the upper Euphrates and Tigris basin in 2070 versus 2000, which support the previous argument. Kitoh et al. (2008) presented even more pessimistic results in their projections of rainfall and stream-flow in the "Fertile Crescent" of the Middle East. ...
Full-text available
In the context of global warming, droughts are increasingly threatening our societies. They last for months or even years, affecting wide areas and large numbers of people, with single drought events sometimes causing economic damages for several billion Euros. Besides the economic damages, droughts can compromise ecosystems and threat food security in the most vulnerable countries. To reduce drought impacts, drought risk assessments need to be implemented in order to support policy makers and water managers in developing coping strategies and drought management plans. Due to the wide-ranging direct and indirect, often cascading impacts, drought risk assessments need to include information tailored to specific sectors and oriented to the needs of specific users. Drought risk as defined here is the likelihood to incur damages and economic losses during and after a drought and depends on the interactions between three dimensions: 1) the severity and the probability of occurrence of a certain drought event, 2) the exposed assets and/or people, and 3) their intrinsic vulnerability or capacity to cope with the hazard. The characterization of these dimensions and the representation of their interactions over different socio-economic sectors poses several challenges. This document discusses these challenges and proposes a theoretical framework to assess drought risk at global scale in order to provide policy relevant information. Based on the described conceptual approach, the JRC developed the Global Drought Observatory (GDO) as a first operational dynamic drought risk monitor for the entire globe.
Full-text available
Water, which is a basic need for humans and the natural world, is a limited resource. It is a cyclical element and not a freely traded commodity. The right to access to water is acknowledged as a basic right because of the importance of water for human life, and for this reason, water is a topic in many human rights texts. The restricted availability of this global resource, which must be sustainable to maintain life, has increased its importance for countries and made its fair and just management necessary. Putting the proper methods into practice is a lot harder than it appears, however, because theories and practices did not sit well together from different perspectives and different ones were developed worldwide. These approaches vary according to countries’ access to water, amount of water usage, level of development, and economic situation. Because of these variables, a number of international studies have been carried out to eliminate the strain on water resources. The focus of these studies is on the definition of water resources and the rights and principles of usage and ownership of water. This study views water as a commercial commodity, and its subject is the pricing strategies for water and the underlying legal basis of the acknowledgement of water resources in Turkey as a public asset.
Drought is a recurring climate phenomenon causing many environmental and agricultural problems among others. To limit drought consequences, it is essential to monitor drought and implement efficient control measures. The aim of this study is to investigate the application of the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) for the 1-, 3-, 6-, 12-, 24-, and 48-month timescales for mapping the drought severity as an effective water management tool in an arid climate region. Calculations of the SPI were performed using historic records of monthly precipitation data of 50 stations over the Sistan and Baluchistan province, southeast of Iran. The majority of the SPI variants showed a moderate to strong spatial correlation with a spherical structure. In 1997, having a higher amount of rainfall, all areas across the province were in a wet or normal condition. In the years with a low rainfall amount (e.g., 2012), the western and southeastern parts of the province have been affected by different degrees of drought especially at the moderate timescales 6 and 12 months. The generated SPI maps identified the most vulnerable regions to drought over the province where government investments should be prioritized for an improved resiliency of the water management infrastructures and for designing a strategic crop management plan with less irrigation water demands.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.