The quantification of uncertainty in the ensemble-based predictions of climate change and the corresponding hydrological impact is necessary for the development of robust climate adaptation plans. Although the equifinality of hydrological modeling has been discussed for a long time, its influence on the hydrological analysis of climate change has not been studied enough to provide a definite idea about the relative contributions of uncertainty contained in both multiple general circulation models (GCMs) and multi-parameter ensembles to hydrological projections. This study demonstrated that the impact of multi-GCM ensemble uncertainty on direct runoff projections for headwater watersheds could be an order of magnitude larger than that of multi-parameter ensemble uncertainty. The finding suggests that the selection of appropriate GCMs should be much more emphasized than that of a parameter set among behavioral ones. When projecting soil moisture and groundwater, on the other hand, the hydrological modeling equifinality was more influential than the multi-GCM ensemble uncertainty. Overall, the uncertainty of GCM projections was dominant for relatively rapid hydrological components while the uncertainty of hydrological model parameterization was more significant for slow components. In addition, uncertainty in hydrological projections was much more closely associated with uncertainty in the ensemble projections of precipitation than temperature, indicating a need to pay closer attention to precipitation data for improved modeling reliability. Uncertainty in hydrological component ensemble projections showed unique responses to uncertainty in the precipitation and temperature ensembles.
This study aims to assess the spatiotemporal characteristics of agricultural droughts in Bangladesh during 1981–2015 using the Effective Drought Index (EDI). Monthly precipitation data for 36 years (1980–2015) obtained from 27 metrological stations, were used in this study. The EDI performance was evaluated for four sub-regions over the country through comparisons with historical drought records identified by regional analysis. Analysis at a regional level showed that EDI could reasonably detect the drought years/events during the study period. The study also presented that the overall drought severity had increased during the past 35 years. The characteristics (severity and duration) of drought were also analyzed in terms of the spatiotemporal evolution of the frequency of drought events. It was found that the western and central regions of the country are comparatively more vulnerable to drought. Moreover, the southwestern region is more prone to extreme drought, whereas the central region is more prone to severe droughts. Besides, the central region was more prone to extra-long-term droughts, while the coastal areas in the southwestern as well as in the central and north-western regions were more prone to long-term droughts. The frequency of droughts in all categories significantly increased during the last quinquennial period (2011 to 2015). The seasonal analysis showed that the north-western areas were prone to extreme droughts during the Kharif (wet) and Rabi (dry) seasons. The central and northern regions were affected by recurring severe droughts in all cropping seasons. Further, the most significant increasing trend of the drought-affected area was observed within the central region, especially during the pre-monsoon (March–May) season. The results of this study can aid policymakers in the development of drought mitigation strategies in the future.
Abstract. There are a number of statistical techniques that downscale coarse climate information from general circulation models (GCMs). However, many of them do not reproduce the small-scale spatial variability of precipitation exhibited by the observed meteorological data, which is an important factor for predicting hydrologic response to climatic forcing. In this study a new downscaling technique (Bias-Correction and Stochastic Analog method; BCSA) was developed to produce stochastic realizations of bias-corrected daily GCM precipitation fields that preserve both the spatial autocorrelation structure of observed daily precipitation sequences and the observed temporal frequency distribution of daily rainfall over space. We used the BCSA method to downscale 4 different daily GCM precipitation predictions from 1961 to 1999 over the state of Florida, and compared the skill of the method to results obtained with the commonly used bias-correction and spatial disaggregation (BCSD) approach, a modified version of BCSD which reverses the order of spatial disaggregation and bias-correction (SDBC), and the bias-correction and constructed analog (BCCA) method. Spatial and temporal statistics, transition probabilities, wet/dry spell lengths, spatial correlation indices, and variograms for wet (June through September) and dry (October through May) seasons were calculated for each method. Results showed that (1) BCCA underestimated mean daily precipitation for both wet and dry seasons while the BCSD, SDBC and BCSA methods accurately reproduced these characteristics, (2) the BCSD and BCCA methods underestimated temporal variability of daily precipitation and thus did not reproduce daily precipitation standard deviations, transition probabilities or wet/dry spell lengths as well as the SDBC and BCSA methods, and (3) the BCSD, BCCA and SDBC methods underestimated spatial variability in daily precipitation resulting in underprediction of spatial variance and overprediction of spatial correlation, whereas the new stochastic technique (BCSA) replicated observed spatial statistics for both the wet and dry seasons. This study underscores the need to carefully select a downscaling method that reproduces all precipitation characteristics important for the hydrologic system under consideration if local hydrologic impacts of climate variability and change are going to be reasonably predicted. For low-relief, rainfall-dominated watersheds, where reproducing small-scale spatiotemporal precipitation variability is important, the BCSA method is recommended for use over the BCSD, BCCA, or SDBC methods.
The relative performance of global climate models (GCMs) of phases 5 and 6 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5 and CMIP6, respectively) was assessed in this study based on their ability to simulate annual and seasonal mean rainfall and temperature over Bangladesh for the period 1977-2005. The multiple statistical metrics were used to measure the performance of the GCMs at 30 meteorological observation stations. Two robust multicriteria decision analysis methods were used to integrate the results obtained using different metrics for an unbiased ranking of the GCMs. The results revealed MIROC5 as the most skilful among CMIP5 GCMs and ACCESS-CM2 among CMIP6 GCMs. Overall, a significant improvement in CMIP6 MME compared to CMIP5 MME was noticed in simulating rainfall over Bangladesh at annual and seasonal scales. CMIP6 MME also showed significant reduction in maximum and minimum temperature biases over Bangladesh. However, systematic wet and cold biases still exist in CMIP6 models for Bangladesh. CMIP6 GCMs showed higher spatial correlation with observed data compared to CMIP5 GCMs, but higher difference in terms of standard deviations and centered root mean square errors, indicating better performance in simulating geographical distribution but lower performance in simulating spatial variability of most of the climate variables for different timescales. In terms of Taylor skill score, the CMIP6 MME showed higher performance in simulating rainfall but lower performance in simulating temperature compared to CMIP5 MME for most of the timeframes. The findings of this study suggest that the added value of rainfall and temperature simulations in CMIP6 models is incompatible with the climate models used in this research.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.