The Narmada river basin is a highly regulated catchment in central India, supporting a population of over 16 million people. In such extensively modified hydrological systems, the influence of anthropogenic alterations is often underrepresented or excluded entirely by large-scale hydrological models. The Global Water Availability Assessment (GWAVA) model is applied to the Upper Narmada, with all major dams, water abstractions and irrigation command areas included, which allows for the development of a holistic methodology for the assessment of water resources in the basin. The model is driven with 17 Global Circulation Models (GCMs) from the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) ensemble to assess the impact of climate change on water resources in the basin for the period 2031–2060. The study finds that the hydrological regime within the basin is likely to intensify over the next half-century as a result of future climate change, causing long-term increases in monsoon season flow across the Upper Narmada. Climate is expected to have little impact on dry season flows, in comparison to water demand intensification over the same period, which may lead to increased water stress in parts of the basin.

No abstract

There has been renewed interest in the performance, functionality, and sustainability of traditional small-scale storage interventions (check dams, farm bunds and tanks) used within semi-arid regions for the improvement of local water security and landscape preservation. The Central Groundwater Board of India is encouraging the construction of such interventions for the alleviation of water scarcity and to improve groundwater recharge. It is important for water resource management to understand the hydrological effect of these interventions at the basin scale. The quantification of small-scale interventions in hydrological modelling is often neglected, especially in large-scale modelling activities, as data availability is low and their hydrological functioning is uncertain. A version of the Global Water Availability Assessment (GWAVA) water resources model was developed to assess the impact of interventions on the water balance of the Cauvery Basin and two smaller sub-catchments. Model results demonstrate that farm bunds appear to have a negligible effect on the average annual simulated streamflow at the outlets of the two sub-catchments and the basin, whereas tanks and check dams have a more significant and time varying effect. The open water surface of the interventions contributed to an increase in evaporation losses across the catchment. The change in simulated groundwater storage with the inclusion of interventions was not as significant as catchment-scale literature and field studies suggest. The model adaption used in this study provides a step-change in the conceptualisation and quantification of the consequences of small-scale storage interventions in large- or basin-scale hydrological models.

<p>Droughts are known to be one of the most damaging and costly natural hazards as a result of their large spatial scale, creeping nature and long duration. They have widespread primary and secondary impacts, and as such, proactive drought management is crucial to mitigate those impacts. In order to do so, it is crucial to understand the drought risk in terms of the characteristics of the drought hazard, who or what is exposed to the drought hazard, and who (or what) is vulnerable to the effects of drought. Drought mitigation, adaptation and management was adopted as one of five strategic objectives under the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNNCD) 2018-2030 Strategic Framework. Country Parties to the UNCCD agreed a monitoring framework and a range of indicators in order to track progress towards this objective.</p><p>Here we present new guidance created to help Parties to the UNCCD report on their progress towards Strategic Objective 3 ‘To mitigate, adapt to, and manage the effects of drought in order to enhance resilience of vulnerable populations and ecosystems’. Progress is monitored using three indicators, characterising the three fundamental components of risk: drought hazard, exposure to drought and vulnerability to drought. The three indicators, as agreed by Parties to the UNCCD, are:</p><ul><li>Trends in the proportion of land under drought over the total land area,</li> <li>Trends in the proportion of the total population exposed to drought, and</li> <li>Trends in the degree of drought vulnerability.</li> </ul><p>Acknowledging the need for global applicability, the methods recommended to calculate these three indicators balance state-of-the-art science with relative simplicity, whilst also meeting the requirements set out in official UNCCD Decisions, guidelines of the World Meteorological Organization, and where possible utilising datasets used for other reporting activities (e.g. the Sustainable Development Goals).</p><p>The recommended methods for each indicator are illustrated using contrasting case studies from the UK and Thailand, utilising the recommended globally available datasets to calculate the three indicators listed above. In-country data are also used, where available, to calculate the indicators, highlighting the benefits of increased spatial resolution, and/or sensitivity to assessing changes in drought hazard, exposure or vulnerability over time. Finally, opportunities for the future of national reporting on drought risk are discussed.</p>

The increasing impact of anthropogenic interference on river basins has facilitated the development of the representation of human influences in large-scale models. The representation of groundwater and large reservoirs have realised significant developments recently. Groundwater and reservoir representation in the Global Water Availability Assessment (GWAVA) model have been improved, critically, with a minimal increase in model complexity and data input requirements, in keeping with the model’s applicability to regions with low-data availability. The increased functionality was assessed in two highly anthropogenically influenced basins. A revised groundwater routine was incorporated into GWAVA, which is fundamentally driven by three input parameters, and improved the simulation of streamflow and baseflow in the headwater catchments such that low-flow model skill increased 33–67% in the Cauvery and 66–100% in the Narmada. The existing reservoir routine was extended and improved the simulation of streamflow in catchments downstream of major reservoirs, using two calibratable parameters. The model performance was improved between 15% and 30% in the Cauvery and 7–30% in the Narmada, with the daily reservoir releases in the Cauvery improving significantly between 26% and 164%. The improvement of the groundwater and reservoir routines in GWAVA proved successful in improving the model performance, and the inclusions allowed for improved traceability of simulated water balance components. This study illustrates that improvement in the representation of human–water interactions in large-scale models is possible, without excessively increasing the model complexity and input data requirements.

A robust hydrological assessment is challenging in regions where human interference, within all aspects of the hydrological system, significantly alters the flow regime of rivers. The challenge was to extend a large-scale water resources model, GWAVA, to better represent water resources without increasing the model complexity. A groundwater and a regulated reservoir routine were incorporated into GWAVA using modifications of the existing AMBHAS-1D and Hanasaki methodologies, respectively. The groundwater routine can be varied in complexity when sufficient input data is available but fundamentally is driven by three input parameters. The reservoir routine was extended to account for the presence of large, regulated reservoirs using two calibratable parameters. The additional groundwater processes and reservoir regulation was tested in two highly anthropogenically influenced basins in India: the Cauvery and Narmada. The inclusion of the revised groundwater routine improved the simulation of streamflow in the headwater catchments and was successful in improving the representation of the baseflow component. In addition, the model was able to produce a time series of daily groundwater levels, recharge to groundwater and groundwater abstraction. The regulated reservoir routine improved the simulation of streamflow in catchments downstream of major reservoirs, where the streamflow was largely reflective of reservoir releases, when calibrated using downstream observed streamflow records. The model was able to provide a more robust representation of the annual volume and daily outflow released from the major reservoirs and simulate the major reservoir storages adequately. The addition of one-dimensional groundwater processes and a regulated reservoir routine proved successful in improving the model performance and traceability of water balance components, without excessively increasing the model complexity and input data requirements.

<p>Droughts are known to be one of the most damaging and costly natural hazards as a result of their large spatial scale, creeping nature and long duration. They have widespread primary and secondary impacts, and as such, proactive drought management is crucial to mitigate those impacts. In order to do so, it is crucial to understand the drought risk – i.e. the characteristics of the drought hazard, who or what is exposed to the drought hazard, and who (or what) is vulnerable to the effects of drought. Drought mitigation is one of five strategic objectives under the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD) 2018-2030 Strategic Framework, under which a monitoring framework and a range of indicators was agreed by country Parties to the UNCCD.</p><p>Here we present new guidance created to help Parties to the UNCCD report on their progress towards Strategic Objective 3 ‘To mitigate, adapt to, and manage the effects of drought in order to enhance resilience of vulnerable populations and ecosystems’. Progress is monitored using three indicators, capturing the three fundamental components of risk: drought hazard, exposure to drought and vulnerability to drought. The three indicators, as agreed by Parties to the UNCCD, are:</p><ul><li>Trends in the proportion of land under drought over the total land area,</li> <li>Trends in the proportion of the total population exposed to drought, and</li> <li>Trends in the degree of drought vulnerability.</li> </ul><p>Acknowledging the need for global applicability, the methods recommended to calculate these three indicators balance state-of-the-art science with relative simplicity, whilst also meeting the requirements set out in official UNCCD Decisions, guidelines of the World Meteorological Organization, and where possible utilising datasets used for other reporting activities (e.g. the Sustainable Development Goals). The methods for each indicator are illustrated using contrasting case studies, highlighting the flexibility of the approaches recommended, as well as opportunities for the future of national reporting on drought risk.</p>

No abstract