Abstract[Drought indicators are proliferating, but with little consideration of which are most meaningful for describing drought impacts. A number of recent reviews compare different drought indicators, but none assess which indicators are actually used in the many operational drought monitoring and early warning efforts, why they were selected, or whether they have been 'ground-truthed', i.e., compared with information representing local drought conditions and/or impacts. Also lacking is a comprehensive assessment of the state of monitoring of drought impacts. To help fill this gap, we combine a review of drought indicators and impacts with a survey of 33 providers of operational drought monitoring and early warning systems from global to regional scales. Despite considerable variety in the indicators used operationally, certain patterns emerge. Both the literature review and the survey reveal that impact monitoring does exist but has rarely been systematized. Efforts to test drought indicators have mostly focused on agricultural drought. Our review points to a current trend towards the design and use of composite indicators, but with limited evaluation of the links between indicators and drought impacts. Overall, we find that much progress has been made both in research and practice on drought indicators, but monitoring and early warning systems are not yet strongly linked with the assessment of wider impacts on the environment and society. To understand drought impacts fully requires a better framing of drought as a coupled dynamic between the environment and society.]

Drought monitoring and early warning (M&EW) systems are an important component of agriculture/silviculture drought risk assessment. Many operational information systems rely mostly on meteorological indicators, and a few incorporate vegetation state information. However, the relationships between meteorological drought indicators and agricultural/silvicultural drought impacts vary across Europe. The details of this variability have not been elucidated sufficiently on a continental scale in Europe to inform drought risk management at administrative scales. The objective of this study is to fill this gap and evaluate how useful the variety of meteorological indicators are to assess agricultural/silvicultural drought across Europe. The first part of the analysis systematically linked meteorological drought indicators to remote sensing based vegetation indices (VIs) for Europe at NUTs3 administrative regions scale using correlation analysis for crops and forests. In a second step, a stepwise multiple linear regression model was deployed to identify variables explaining the spatial differences observed. Finally, corn crop yield in Germany was chosen as a case study to verify VIs' representativeness of agricultural drought impacts. Results show that short accumulation periods of SPI and SPEI are best linked to crop vegetation stress in most cases, which further validates the use of SPI3 in existing operational drought monitors. However, large regional differences in correlations are also revealed. Climate (temperature and precipitation) explained the largest proportion of variance, suggesting that meteorological indices are less informative of agricultural/silvicultural drought in colder/wetter parts of Europe. These findings provide important context for interpreting meteorological indices on widely used national to continental M&EW systems, leading to a better understanding of where/when such M&EW tools can be indicative of likely agricultural stress and impacts.

Abstract. Drought monitoring and early warning is an important measure to enhance resilience towards drought. While there are numerous operational systems using different drought indicators, there is no consensus on which indicator best represents drought impact occurrence for any given sector. Furthermore, thresholds are widely applied in these indicators but, to date, little empirical evidence exists as to which indicator thresholds trigger impacts on society, the economy, and ecosystems. The main obstacle for evaluating commonly used drought indicators is a lack of information on drought impacts. Our aim was therefore to exploit text-based data from the European Drought Impact report Inventory (EDII) to identify indicators that are meaningful for region-, sector-, and season-specific impact occurrence, and to empirically determine indicator thresholds. In addition, we tested the predictability of impact occurrence based on the best-performing indicators. To achieve these aims we applied a correlation analysis and an ensemble regression tree approach, using Germany and the UK (the most data-rich countries in the EDII) as test beds. As candidate indicators we chose two meteorological indicators (Standardized Precipitation Index, SPI, and Standardized Precipitation Evaporation Index, SPEI) and two hydrological indicators (streamflow and groundwater level percentiles). The analysis revealed that accumulation periods of SPI and SPEI best linked to impact occurrence are longer for the UK compared with Germany, but there is variability within each country, among impact categories and, to some degree, seasons. The median of regression tree splitting values, which we regard as estimates of thresholds of impact occurrence, was around −1 for SPI and SPEI in the UK; distinct differences between northern/northeastern vs. southern/central regions were found for Germany. Predictions with the ensemble regression tree approach yielded reasonable results for regions with good impact data coverage. The predictions also provided insights into the EDII, in particular highlighting drought events where missing impact reports may reflect a lack of recording rather than true absence of impacts. Overall, the presented quantitative framework proved to be a useful tool for evaluating drought indicators, and to model impact occurrence. In summary, this study demonstrates the information gain for drought monitoring and early warning through impact data collection and analysis. It highlights the important role that quantitative analysis with impact data can have in providing "ground truth" for drought indicators, alongside more traditional stakeholder-led approaches.

Abstract. Current drought monitoring and early warning systems use different indicators for monitoring drought conditions and apply different indicator thresholds and rules for assigning drought intensity classes or issue warnings or alerts. Nevertheless, there is little knowledge on the meaning of different hydro-meteorologic indicators for impact occurrence on the ground. To date, there have been very few attempts to systematically characterize the indicator-impact relationship owing to sparse and patchy data on drought impacts. The newly established European Drought Impact report Inventory (EDII) offers the possibility to investigate this linkage. The aim of this study was to explore the link between hydro-meteorologic indicators and drought impacts for the case study area Germany and thus to test the potential of qualitative impact data for evaluating the performance of drought indicators. As drought indicators two climatological drought indices -the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) and the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) -as well as streamflow and groundwater level percentiles were selected. Linkage was assessed though data visualization, extraction of indicator values concurrent with impact onset, and correlation analysis between monthly time series of indicator and impact data at the federal state level, and between spatial patterns for selected drought events. The analysis clearly revealed a significant moderate to strong correlation for some states and drought events allowing for an intercomparison of the performance of different drought indicators. Important findings were strongest correlation for intermediate accumulation periods of SPI and SPEI, a slightly better performance of SPEI versus SPI, and a similar performance of streamflow percentiles to SPI in many cases. Apart from these commonalities, the analysis also exposed differences among federal states and drought events, suggesting that the linkage is time variant and region specific to some degree. Concerning "thresholds" for drought impact onset, i.e. indicator values concurrent with past impact onsets, we found that no single "best" threshold value can be identified but impacts occur within a range of indicator values. Nevertheless, the median of the threshold distributions showed differences between northern/northeastern versus southern/southwestern federal states, and among drought events. While the findings strongly depend on data and may change with a growing number of EDII entries in the future, this study clearly demonstrates the feasibility of evaluating hydro-meteorologic variables with text-based impact reports and highlights the value of impact reporting as a tool for monitoring drought conditions.

No abstract