A stochastic reconstruction framework for analysis of water resource system vulnerability to climate‐induced changes in river flow regime

[1] Assessments of potential impacts of climate change on water resources systems are generally based on the use of downscaled climate scenarios to force hydrological and water resource systems models and hence quantify potential changes in system response. This approach, however, has several limitations. The uncertainties in current climate and hydrological models can be large, such analyses are rapidly outdated as new scenarios become available, and limited insight into system response is obtained. Here, we propose an alternative methodology in which system vulnerability is analyzed directly as a function of the potential variations in flow characteristics. We develop a stochastic reconstruction framework that generates a large ensemble of perturbed flow series at the local scale to represent a range of potential flow responses to climate change. From a theoretical perspective, the proposed reconstruction scheme can be considered as an extension of both the conventional resampling and the simple delta-methods. By the use of a two-parameter representation of regime change (i.e., the shift in the timing of the annual peak and the shift in the annual flow volume), system vulnerability can be visualized in a two-dimensional map. The methodology is applied to the current water resource system in southern Alberta, Canada, to explore the system's vulnerability to potential changes in the streamflow regime. Our study shows that the system is vulnerable to the expected decrease in annual flow volume, particularly when it is combined with an earlier annual peak. Under such conditions, adaptation will be required to return the system to the feasible operational mode.

[1]  Robert Leconte,et al.  Adaptation to Climate Change in the Management of a Canadian Water-Resources System Exploited for Hydropower , 2009 .

[2]  S. C. Johnson Hierarchical clustering schemes , 1967, Psychometrika.

[3]  Demetris Koutsoyiannis,et al.  A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data , 2010 .

[4]  R. Wilby,et al.  A comparison of statistical downscaling and climate change factor methods: impacts on low flows in the River Thames, United Kingdom , 2005 .

[5]  R. Nelsen An Introduction to Copulas , 1998 .

[6]  Arthur Petersen,et al.  Agreeing to disagree: uncertainty management in assessing climate change, impacts and responses by the IPCC , 2009 .

[7]  R. Stedman Risk and Climate Change: Perceptions of Key Policy Actors in Canada , 2004, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[8]  Keith Beven,et al.  On doing better hydrological science , 2008 .

[9]  D. Lettenmaier,et al.  Implications of 21st century climate change for the hydrology of Washington State , 2010 .

[10]  H. Fowler,et al.  Climate change and mountain water resources: overview and recommendations for research, management and policy , 2011 .

[11]  E. Stakhiv,et al.  Are climate models “ready for prime time” in water resources management applications, or is more research needed? , 2010 .

[12]  A. Pietroniro,et al.  Glacier contribution to the North and South Saskatchewan Rivers , 2009 .

[13]  D. Rupp,et al.  Time scale and intensity dependency in multiplicative cascades for temporal rainfall disaggregation , 2009 .

[14]  Robert L. Wilby,et al.  Evaluating climate model outputs for hydrological applications , 2010 .

[15]  C. Prudhomme,et al.  Downscaling of global climate models for flood frequency analysis: where are we now? , 2002 .

[16]  Martha C. Anderson,et al.  Climate change impacts and adaptation: A Canadian perspective , 2004 .

[17]  David V. Budescu,et al.  Improving Communication of Uncertainty in the Reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change , 2009, Psychological science.

[18]  M. Sklar Fonctions de repartition a n dimensions et leurs marges , 1959 .

[19]  E. Wood,et al.  Bias correction of monthly precipitation and temperature fields from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change AR4 models using equidistant quantile matching , 2010 .

[20]  G. Brier,et al.  Some applications of statistics to meteorology , 1958 .

[21]  Dennis P. Lettenmaier,et al.  A comparison of regional flood frequency estimation methods using a resampling method , 1990 .

[22]  Eric F. Wood,et al.  Decreasing river discharge in northern Canada , 2005 .

[23]  C. Genest,et al.  Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Copula Modeling but Were Afraid to Ask , 2007 .

[24]  B. Rémillard,et al.  Goodness-of-fit tests for copulas: A review and a power study , 2006 .

[25]  Julia Hall,et al.  Vulnerability Analysis of Future Public Water Supply Under Changing Climate Conditions: A Study of the Moy Catchment, Western Ireland , 2010 .

[26]  C. De Michele,et al.  On the Use of Copulas in Hydrology: Theory and Practice , 2007 .

[27]  Fabrizio Durante,et al.  On the construction of multivariate extreme value models via copulas , 2009 .

[28]  L. Hay,et al.  A COMPARISON OF DELTA CHANGE AND DOWNSCALED GCM SCENARIOS FOR THREE MOUNTAINOUS BASINS IN THE UNITED STATES 1 , 2000 .

[29]  Roger A. Pielke,et al.  Regional climate downscaling: What's the point? , 2012 .

[30]  C. Prudhomme,et al.  Regionalised impacts of climate change on flood flows: data , 2006 .

[31]  Paul H. Whitfield,et al.  Detection of runoff timing changes in pluvial, nival, and glacial rivers of western Canada , 2009 .

[32]  T. Barnett,et al.  Potential impacts of a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominated regions , 2005, Nature.

[33]  Keith Beven,et al.  I believe in climate change but how precautionary do we need to be in planning for the future? , 2011 .

[34]  Richard E. Chandler,et al.  A framework for interpreting climate model outputs , 2010 .