Drought assessment has been outpaced by climate change: empirical arguments for a paradigm shift

Zachary H. Hoylman (), R. Kyle Bocinsky and Kelsey G. Jencso
Additional contact information
Zachary H. Hoylman: University of Montana
R. Kyle Bocinsky: University of Montana
Kelsey G. Jencso: University of Montana

Nature Communications, 2022, vol. 13, issue 1, 1-8

Abstract: Abstract Despite the acceleration of climate change, erroneous assumptions of climate stationarity are still inculcated in the management of water resources in the United States (US). The US system for drought detection, which triggers billions of dollars in emergency resources, adheres to this assumption with preference towards 60-year (or longer) record lengths for drought characterization. Using observed data from 1,934 Global Historical Climate Network (GHCN) sites across the US, we show that conclusions based on long climate records can substantially bias assessment of drought severity. Bias emerges by assuming that conditions from the early and mid 20th century are as likely to occur in today’s climate. Numerical simulations reveal that drought assessment error is relatively low with limited climatology lengths (~30 year) and that error increases with longer record lengths where climate is changing rapidly. We assert that non-stationarity in climate must be accounted for in contemporary assessments to more accurately portray present drought risk.

Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-30316-5 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:nat:natcom:v:13:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1038_s41467-022-30316-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/ncomms/

DOI: 10.1038/s41467-022-30316-5

Access Statistics for this article

Nature Communications is currently edited by Nathalie Le Bot, Enda Bergin and Fiona Gillespie

More articles in Nature Communications from Nature
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().