The challenge of unprecedented floods and droughts in risk management

Risk management has reduced vulnerability to floods and droughts globally1,2, yet their impacts are still increasing3. An improved understanding of the causes of changing impacts is therefore needed, but has been hampered by a lack of empirical data4,5. On the basis of a global dataset of 45 pairs of events that occurred within the same area, we show that risk management generally reduces the impacts of floods and droughts but faces difficulties in reducing the impacts of unprecedented events of a magnitude not previously experienced. If the second event was much more hazardous than the first, its impact was almost always higher. This is because management was not designed to deal with such extreme events: for example, they exceeded the design levels of levees and reservoirs. In two success stories, the impact of the second, more hazardous, event was lower, as a result of improved risk management governance and high investment in integrated management. The observed difficulty of managing unprecedented events is alarming, given that more extreme hydrological events are projected owing to climate change3

Bias correction of global high-resolution precipitation climatologies using streamflow observations from 9372 catchments

We introduce a set of global high-resolution (0.05°) precipitation (P) climatologies corrected for bias using streamflow (Q) observations from 9372 stations worldwide. For each station, we inferred the “true” long-term P using a Budyko curve, which is an empirical equation relating long-term P, Q, and potential evaporation. We subsequently calculated long-term bias correction factors for three state-of-the-art P climatologies [the “WorldClim version 2” database (WorldClim V2); Climatologies at High Resolution for the Earth’s Land Surface Areas, version 1.2 (CHELSA V1.2 ); and Climate Hazards Group Precipitation Climatology, version 1 (CHPclim V1)], after which we used random-forest regression to produce global gap-free bias correction maps for the P climatologies. Monthly climatological bias correction factors were calculated by disaggregating the long-term bias correction factors on the basis of gauge catch efficiencies. We found that all three climatologies systematically underestimate P over parts of all major mountain ranges globally, despite the explicit consideration of orography in the production of each climatology. In addition, all climatologies underestimate P at latitudes >60°N, likely because of gauge undercatch. Exceptionally high long-term correction factors (>1.5) were obtained for all three P climatologies in Alaska, High Mountain Asia, and Chile—regions characterized by marked elevation gradients, sparse gauge networks, and significant snowfall. Using the bias-corrected WorldClim V2, we demonstrated that other widely used P datasets (GPCC V2015, GPCP V2.3, and MERRA-2) severely underestimate P over Chile, the Himalayas, and along the Pacific coast of North America. Mean P for the global land surface based on the bias-corrected WorldClim V2 is 862 mm yr−1 (a 9.4% increase over the original WorldClim V2). The annual and monthly bias-corrected P climatologies have been released as the Precipitation Bias Correction (PBCOR) dataset, which is available onlin

Validation of a PDF - Monte Carlo method coupled with an ILDM kinetic model on turbulent jet flames

SIGLEAvailable from INIST (FR), Document Supply Service, under shelf-number : 26165 A, issue : a.1998 n.50 / INIST-CNRS - Institut de l'Information Scientifique et TechniqueFRFranc