Integrated geospatial approach for adaptive rainwater harvesting site selection under the impact of climate change

Abstract

The impact of global climate change on water resources is a pressing concern, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, where water shortages are becoming increasingly severe. Rainwater harvesting (RWH) offers a promising solution to address these challenges. However, the process of selecting suitable RWH sites is complex. This paper introduces a comprehensive methodology that leverages various technologies and data sources to identify suitable RWH locations in the northern region of Iraq, considering both historical and future scenarios. The study employs remote sensing and geographic information systems to collect and process geospatial data, which are essential for the site selection process. AHP is utilized as a decision-making tool to assess and rank potential RWH locations based on multiple criteria, helping to prioritize the most suitable sites. The WLC approach is used to combine and weigh various factors, enabling a systematic evaluation of site suitability. To account for the uncertainty associated with future climate conditions, a stochastic weather generator is employed to simulate historical and future precipitation data for period (1980–2022) and (2031–2100). This ensures that the assessment considers changing climate patterns. Historical precipitation values ranged from 270 to 490 mm, while future projections indicate a decrease, with values varying from 255 to 390 mm. This suggests a potential reduction in available water resources due to climate change. The runoff for historical rainfall values ranged from 190 mm (poor) to 490 mm (very good). In the future projections, runoff values vary from 180 mm (very poor) to 390 mm (good). This analysis highlights the potential impact of reduced precipitation on water availability. There is a strong correlation between rainfall and runoff, with values of 95% for historical data and 98.83% for future projections. This indicates that changes in precipitation directly affect water runoff. The study incorporates several criteria in the model, including soil texture, historical and future rainfall data, land use/cover, slope, and drainage density. These criteria were selected based on the nature of the study region and dataset availability. The suitability zones are classified into four categories for both historical potential and future projections of RWH zones: very high suitability, covering approximately 8.2%. High suitability, encompassing around 22.6%. Moderate suitability, constituting about 37.4%. Low suitability, accounting for 31.8% of the study region. For the potential zones of RWH in the future projection, the distribution is as follows: very high suitability, approximately 6.1%. High suitability, around 18.3%. Moderate suitability, roughly 31.2%. Low suitability, making up about 44.4% of the study region. The research's findings have significant implications for sustainable water resource management in the northern region of Iraq. As climate change exacerbates water scarcity, identifying suitable RWH locations becomes crucial for ensuring water availability. This methodology, incorporating advanced technology and data sources, provides a valuable tool for addressing these challenges and enhancing the future of water management to face of climate change. However, more investigations and studies need to be conducted in near future in the study region.

Rainwater Harvesting Site Selection for Drought-Prone Areas in Somali and Borena Zones, Oromia Regional State, Ethiopia: A Geospatial and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis

“…According to [111], clay soil has the highest runoff potential with a very low infiltration rate and is highly suitable for water harvesting, whereas sandy loam and sandy soils have the least potential for water storage because they have the lowest water-holding capacity due to their high infiltration rate. The same is true for sparsely vegetated land, such as bare land and shrubland, which are types of land cover that are more often recommended for water harvesting site selection [112].…”