A Review of User Perceptions of Drought Indices and Indicators Used in the Diverse Climates of North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
: Drought monitoring and early detection have improved greatly in recent decades through the development and refinement of numerous indices and indicators. However, a lack of guidance, based on user experience, exists as to which drought monitoring tools are most appropriate in a given location. This review paper summarizes the results of targeted user engagement and the published literature to improve the understanding of drought across North America, and to enhance the utility of drought monitoring tools. Workshops and surveys were used to assess and make general conclusions about the perceived performance of drought indicators, indices and impacts information used for monitoring drought in the five main Köppen climate types (Tropical, Temperate, Continental, Polar Tundra, Dry) found across Canada, Mexico, and the United States. In Tropical, humid Temperate, and southerly Continental climates, droughts are perceived to be more short-term (less than 6 months) in duration rather than long-term (more than 6 months). In Polar Tundra climates, Dry climates, Temperate climates with dry warm seasons, and northerly Continental climates, droughts are perceived to be more long-term than short-term. In general, agricultural and hydrological droughts were considered to be the most important drought types. Drought impacts related to agriculture, water supply, ecosystem, and human health were rated to be of greatest importance. Users identified the most effective indices and indicators for monitoring drought across North America to be the U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM) and Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) (or another measure of precipitation anomaly), followed by the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) (or another satellite-observed vegetation index), temperature anomalies, crop status, soil moisture, streamflow, reservoir storage, water use (demand), and reported drought impacts. Users also noted the importance of indices that measure evapotranspiration, evaporative demand, and snow water content. Drought indices and indicators were generally thought to perform equally well across seasons in Tropical and the colder Continental climates, but their performance was perceived to vary seasonally in Dry, Temperate, Polar Tundra, and the warmer Continental climates, with improved performance during warm and wet times of the year. The drought indices and indicators, in general, were not perceived to perform equally well across geographies. This review paper provides guidance on when (time of year) and where (climate zone) the more popular drought indices and indicators should be used. The paper concludes by noting the importance of understanding how drought, its impacts, and indicators are changing over time as the climate warms, and by recommending ways to strengthen the use of indices and indicators in drought decision-making.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".