Climate change impacts and adaptation related studies in Myanmar are scanty. Therefore this study aims to project future climate scenarios considering two key meteorological parameters-temperature and precipitation -in Belu River Basin in Myanmar. Multi-GCMs approach with ten different GCMs on 10 th to 90 th percentile uncertainty range is studied using time series data of nine meteorological stations. Quantile mapping technique is used to correct the bias in raw GCM data. Bias corrected GCM ensembles are analysed for a wide range of climate scenarios to get the complete picture of climate change pattern for 21 st century. All ten GCM ensembles (four RCP scenarios) indicate that the monsoon to get wetter as well as delayed. August will witness highest amount of rainfall. More rain concentrating over shorter time span suggests likely increase in extreme precipitation events. Only a slight increase is expected on the overall annual precipitation (-1.78~+ 9.14%, range of values from four scenarios). Minimum temperature is found to increase almost twice (+0.64~+5.27C) as compared to maximum temperature (+0.56~+2.82°C) under different scenarios. Summer is the hardest hit season with May and April the most affected months for maximum and minimum temperatures respectively. These results are very useful for further research on assessment of vulnerability and adaptation on water resources and water use sectors in Belu River Basin in Myanmar.
Background Evidence-to-decision (EtD) frameworks provide a structured and transparent approach for groups of experts to use when formulating recommendations or making decisions. While extensively used for clinical and public health recommendations, EtD frameworks are not in widespread use in environmental health. Objectives This review sought to identify, compare and contrast key EtD frameworks for decisions or recommendations on interventions used in clinical medicine, public health or environmental health. Our goal was to identify best practices and guidance which will be used to inform the development of an EtD framework for formulating recommendations regarding interventions to prevent or mitigate the harmful effects of exposure to substances in the environment. Methods We identified a convenience sample of EtD frameworks used by a range of organizations. We searched Medline for systematic reviews of EtD frameworks used in clinical medicine, and public or environmental health. In a qualitative manner, we summarized the decision criteria in the selected frameworks and in the reviews. Results Fourteen key organizations provided 18 EtD frameworks; most frameworks focused on clinical medicine or public health interventions; four focused on environmental health and three on economic considerations. Only one framework was based on an underlying conceptual model, and rarely was a systematic review of potential criteria performed during the frameworks development. GRADE encompasses a set of closely related frameworks for different types of decisions. Harms of interventions were examined in all frameworks and benefits in all but one. Other criteria included certainty of the body of evidence (15 frameworks), resource considerations (15), feasibility (13), equity (12), values (11), acceptability (11), and human rights (2). There was variation in how specific criteria were defined. The five identified systematic reviews reported a similar spectrum of EtD criteria. Discussion The EtD frameworks examined encompassed similar criteria, with tailoring to specific audience needs. However, there is variation in development processes, terminology, level of detail provided and presentation of the criteria. Existing frameworks are a useful starting point for development of one tailored to decision-making in environmental health.
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.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.