Potential Impact of Climate Change Analysis on the Management of Water Resources under Stressed Quantity and Quality Scenarios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Assuring access to high-quality water for its multiple uses is increasingly difficult and relevant, as climate changes are gradually altering the hydrologic cycle and impacting traditional and well-established techniques of water resource management. This manuscript proposes a methodology to assess the impact of climatic variability in pre-established management rules, using spatially interpolated rain gauged data for two future emission scenarios. With them, water allocation and water quality parameters are simulated for the Piracicaba, Capivari, and Jundiaí watersheds (PCJ watersheds) in São Paulo, Brazil, employing comparisons among scenarios of historical and climate modified hydrological series. Five selected water quality indicators are used to confirm that the introduction of climate variation signals worsens water quality parameters, along with a decrease in the capability to meet water demand. This finding suggests the importance of including climate change impact in similar studies in management plans. The results indicate higher stress levels on the watershed when changes in the hydrological regime are introduced by the future conditions modeled and driven by the regional climate model (RCM). Water availability decreases and water quality deteriorates, indicating that stakeholders must take action to progressively implement stricter control measures to achieve the goals established by the watershed master plan regarding the limits or classification set by the body governing the watershed in question. On average, there was an increase of about four times the amount of river stretches (in kilometres), from 29.6 km to 161.9 km outside the limits of the established framework. The average was taken for all parameters as presented in the discussion.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".