Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

IWA Publishing, Hydrology Research, 5(48), p. 1311-1326

DOI: 10.2166/nh.2016.258

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Comparison of different threshold level methods for drought propagation analysis in Germany

Journal article published in 2016 by B. Heudorfer ORCID, K. Stahl
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

The Threshold Level Method is an approach that enables comparability across all hydrological levels. This advantage is used especially in studies on drought propagation. There are different calculation procedures for this method. The effect that the choice of a variable versus a constant threshold level method has on drought characteristics and drought propagation patterns has not been fully explored yet. Also, most drought propagation studies have analyzed modelled data, suggesting that applicability to observations be tested. We tested the Constant and the Variable Threshold Level Method for the 10th, 20th and 30th percentile on observed precipitation, streamflow, and groundwater data from Germany, and compared drought characteristics and drought propagation patterns by means of statistical analysis and synoptic assessment. The characteristic effects of choosing a variable versus a constant threshold are: (1) a substantial increase in short droughts, (2) a moderate decrease in intermediate droughts and (3) a minor increase in long droughts. Furthermore, in slow-reacting lowland catchments, theoretical propagation characteristics could mostly be confirmed. In faster-reacting upland catchments, this was not always the case and considerable differences arose. Sources of ambiguity were predominantly groundwater in lowlands and streamflow in the mountainous catchments. In conclusion, there is potential of diverging inference from the same data, depending on the chosen methodology.