Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment Methodology A Proactive Approach to Managing Drought Risk About the Global Department for Water The World Bank Group’s Global Department for Water brings together financing, knowledge, and implementation in one platform. By combining the Bank’s global knowledge with country investments, this model generates more firepower for transformational solutions to help countries grow sustainably. Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/water or follow us on X: @WorldBankWater. About GWSP This publication received the support of the Global Water Security & Sanitation Partnership (GWSP). GWSP is a multidonor trust fund administered by the World Bank’s Water Global Practice and supported by Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Austria’s Federal Ministry of Finance, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Denmark’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Netherlands’ Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Spain’s Ministry of Economic Affairs and Digital Transformation, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, Switzerland’s State Secretariat for Economic Affairs, the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, U.K. International Development, and the U.S. Agency for International Development. Please visit us at www.worldbank.org/gwsp or follow us on X: @TheGwsp. Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment Methodology A Proactive Approach to Managing Drought Risk © 2024 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or currency of the data included in this work and does not assume responsibility for any errors, omissions, or discrepancies in the information, or liability with respect to the use of or failure to use the information, methods, processes, or conclusions set forth. The boundaries, colors, denominations, links/footnotes and other information shown in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. The citation of works authored by others does not mean the World Bank endorses the views expressed by those authors or the content of their works. Nothing herein shall constitute or be construed or considered to be a limitation upon or waiver of the privileges and immunities of The World Bank, all of which are specifically reserved. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because The World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. Cover photo: © Badre Bahaji / World Food Programme. Used with the permission of World Food Programme / USAID. Further permission required for reuse. Report design: Clarity Global Strategic Communications CONTENTS Contents Foreword vi Acknowledgments vii Executive Summary viii Abbreviations xii 1. Introduction: Understanding Drought Disaster Management and Existing Approaches 1 1.1 Droughts Are Complex and Often Ignored for Too Long 2 1.2 Many Solutions Exist for Proactive Drought Management 7 1.3 Why DRRAs Are Needed and How They Are Organized 12 Notes 13 2. Scoping Coordination and Capacity (Block I) 14 2.1 Scoping Coordination within the Implementing Institution 15 2.2 Scoping Coordination between Government, Donors, Development Partners, and Other Stakeholders 16 2.3 Scoping of Coordination across Government 17 3. Assessing Drought Risk (Block II) 18 3.1 Assessing Current and Recent Drought Hazards 22 3.2 Assessing Main Trends of Future Drought Hazards 30 3.3 Assessing Current and Recent Drought Impacts 34 3.4 Assessing Country/Region Vulnerability to Drought 43 Notes 49 4. Evaluation of Current Resilience (Block III) 50 4.1. Evaluating Current Drought Response 57 4.2 Evaluating Current Drought Preparedness 57 Notes 58 59 67 68 70 73 76 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY iii B OX E S / F I G U R E S Boxes Box 1.1 Drought-Related Terms Used in This Report 3 Box 1.2 How Flash Droughts and Precipitation/Evaporationsheds Impact Water Availability 5 Box 1.3 Nature-Based Solutions Are Integral for Integrated Drought Risk Management 9 Box 3.1 Machine Learning-Based, Data-Driven Drought Risk Assessment for Romania 20 Box 3.2 Drought Monitoring System in Brazil 24 Box 3.3 Hydrometeorological Drought Hazard Characterization in Romania 26 Box 3.4 Preparing a Drought Hazard Overview for Southern Angola with Indices Calculation and Ground Data 28 Box 3.5 Hydrometeorological Projections for Romania 31 Box 3.6 Hydrometeorological Drought Future Scenario Development for the Angola Climate Change and Development Report 32 Box 3.7 Drought Impact Assessment for Romania 39 Box 3.8 Multidimensional Vulnerability Assessment for Romania 44 Box 4.1 European Union-Wide In-Depth Assessment of Drought Management Plans and Climate Adaptation Actions for Drought 52 Figures Figure ES.1 Building Blocks and Sub-Blocks of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment ix Figure 1.1 Cycle of Disaster Risk Management 3 Figure B1.1.1 Types of Water Shortages Based on Context and Driving Forces 4 Figure B1.2.1 Climatic Conditions Leading to Flash Droughts 5 Figure B1.2.2 Precipitationsheds and Evaporationsheds 6 Figure 1.2 Stages of a Drought Event 8 Figure 1.3 Three Pillars of Effective Drought Management as Developed by the Integrated Drought Management Programme 10 Figure 1.4 Drought Risk Assessment Implementation Guide Developed by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery 11 Figure 1.5 Building Blocks and Sub-Blocks of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment 13 Figure 2.1 Block I of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment 15 Figure 3.1 Block II of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment 19 Figure B3.1.1 Example of a Binary Decision Tree for Recognizing Drought Impacts 20 Figure B3.1.2 Drought Risk Maps and Probable Maximum Loss Curves Developed by the EDORA Project 21 iv DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY F I G U R E S / TA B L E S Figure B3.2.1 Stages of Drought and Their Potential Impacts in Brazil 24 Figure B3.3.1 Minimum Value of the SPI 12 and SPI 48 Drought Indices Every Year from 2012 to 2022 in Romania’s River Basin Administrations (Administrative Boundaries) 26 Figure B3.3.2 Minimum Value of the SPEI 12 and SPEI 48 Drought Indices Every Year from 2012 to 2022 in Romania’s River Basin Administrations (Administrative Boundaries) 26 Figure B3.4.1 Drought Evolution in Provinces of Angola, Based on Corrected TMPA Series 28 Figure B3.5.1 Projected Annual SPEI Drought Index in Romania (Reference Period 1995–2014), Multi-Model Ensemble 31 Figure B3.6.1 Frequency of Drought Years with SPI-12 Values Less Than -1 (per Decade) in Historical Simulations and Projections Under the RCP85/SSP585 Scenario 32 Figure B3.6.2 Frequency of Drought Years with SPEI-12 Values Less Than -1 (per Decade) in Historical Simulations and Projections Under the RCP85/SSP585 Scenario 33 Figure 3.2 Overview of Sectors Impacted by Drought 36 Figure B3.7.1 Hydropower Generation in Romania, 2000–2022 40 Figure 3.3 Exploring Vulnerability in Impact and Vulnerability Assessments 43 Figure B3.8.1 Empirical Estimation of Vulnerability Levels Based on the Impact Experienced at Various Drought Hazard Levels 44 Figure B3.8.2 Creation of Empirical Vulnerability Scores and Maps Based on Attribution of Impacts 45 Figure 4.1 Block III of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment 51 Figure B4.1.1 Part of a Questionnaire on the Status of the Drought Policy Framework 52 Figure 4.2 Illustrative Example of the Menu of Measures 55 Figure 5.1 Block IV of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment 60 Tables Table 3.1 Strengths and Weaknesses of Three Types of Drought Risk Assessment 22 Table 3.2 Methodologies for Characterizing Current/Recent Drought Hazards 29 Table 3.3 Methodologies for Characterizing Main Trends in Future Drought Hazards 35 Table 3.4 Methodologies for Drought Impact Assessment 41 Table 3.5 Methodologies for Vulnerability Assessment 46 Table 4.1 Methodologies for Drought Risk Assessment 53 Table 5.1 Methodologies for Prioritizing Potential Investments 62 Table A.1 World Bank Resources and Methodologies Complemented and Supported by the DRRA 68 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY v FOREWORD Dominic Chavez / World Bank Foreword A cross the globe, droughts are becoming more drought management, with a focus on proactive planning. Paired frequent, severe, and widespread. They put with other services in the World Bank’s drought portfolio, this tool economies, livelihoods, and lives at risk. Their can help governments and communities identify key areas where impacts are both explicit and insidious, ranging from lack of they can prioritize resources and investments to build resilience potable water to reduced crop yields to lower educational to drought. It can be tailored to any country’s situation—whether outcomes and economic productivity. Because droughts are the country is in the grip of drought, susceptible to seasonal typically slow to develop and reveal their full impacts, action dry spells, or anticipating a future where drought becomes tends to be delayed until it’s too late. The only option then is widespread in its region. disaster relief. And yet, as the drought passes and recovery efforts cease, it’s easy for the public to lapse back into a state of We cannot prevent drought, but together we can prepare better complacency. That is, until the next drought episode occurs and for it. Preparation empowers us with more choice in times of the cycle of panic and crisis response begins again. crisis—and that, in a world of climate impacts where much is uncertain, brings some peace of mind. The best way to avoid this costly cycle is to take steps to manage drought risks before they manifest. To do that, we need a robust plan of action. That’s why I’m pleased to present the Drought Risk and Resilience Saroj Kumar Jha Assessment Methodology (DRRA). It’s a framework for action that Global Water Director brings together knowledge and best practices from the world of World Bank Group vi DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY AC K N OW L E D G M E N T S Acknowledgments T his report was prepared by a World Bank team led The report benefitted greatly from the strategic direction by Nathan Engle, Lara Loske-García, and Natalia provided by World Bank management, including Saroj Kumar Limones. The methodology was greatly informed by Jha (Global Director, Water Global Practice), Benoît Bosquet the drought risk assessment conducted for Romania and led (Regional Director, Sustainable Development Latin America by Chris-Philip Fischer and Natalia Limones. and Caribbean Region), Yogita Mumssen (Practice Manager, Water Global Practice), and Eileen Burke (Global Lead, Water The authors are grateful for the Water Global Practice’s Resources Management). The team appreciates the valuable regional Latin America and Caribbean team for their global comments and feedback provided by colleagues and peer leadership in applying and testing the Drought Risk and reviewers as part of the safe space review and decision review, Resilience Assessment (DRRA) methodology as part of the including Luc Bonnafous, Markus Enenkel, Peter Goodman, regional Advisory Services and Analytics program Multi- Rashmin Gunasekera, Nagaraja Rao Harshadeep, Stephane Sectorial Impacts of Droughts in Latin America: Vulnerabilities Hallegatte, Brenden Jongman, Harun Onder, William Rex, and Adaptation Strategies. The team thanks David Michaud, Gabriel Sidman, Shaffiq Somani, Kristina Svensson, Ruth Tiffer- Chloe Oliver Viola, Andrea Mariel Juarez Lucas, Ana Cecilia Sotomayor, Pablo Valdivia Zelaya, and Fan Zhang. The team Escalera Rodriguez, and Hye Rean Yoo Kang for championing is also grateful for support from and review by Daniel Tsegai the DRRA methodology to help strengthen drought risk (United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification). management in the region. Clarity Global Strategic Communications designed and laid During the development of this report, the team received out the report and provided conceptual illustrations. Erin invaluable contributions from Christian Borja-Vega, especially Barrett, Sarah Farhat, and Sarah Daggett provided invaluable regarding prioritization of measures. Hila Cohen Mizrav led production and dissemination support. Melissa Edeburn the characterization of the Menu of Measures. Under the copyedited the report, and Ayelen Becker supported several leadership of Klaas de Groot, Gijs Simons (Future Water) logistical processes for the publication of the report. The team developed factsheets for selected nature-based solutions is pleased to recognize generous funding provided through the interventions for drought resilience that have informed this Global Water Security and Sanitation Partnership and support work and were included as excerpts in appendix B. from colleagues across the World Bank Group. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY vii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary T he Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment (DRRA) It is estimated that droughts have reduced gross domestic framework provides guidance for assessing drought product per capita growth rates in developing countries by risk and identifying interventions for increasing 0.39 percent to 0.85 percent (Zaveri, Damania, and Engle 2023). drought resilience. The methodology is built on four blocks, which consist of 10 sub-blocks that describe a comprehensive Droughts manifest as slow-onset disasters, which are typically and structured approach to strengthening drought responses associated with delayed disaster relief responses. Although their and preparedness. The DRRA considers context by scoping impacts could be lessened with timely and coordinated action, implementing institution capacity and organization, client, donor droughts historically have been overlooked until they develop and partner engagement, and coordination across governments into full-fledged emergencies. More recently, flash droughts, the in the given jurisdiction. Overall drought risk is then assessed by more rapid-onset counterpart of more “conventional” droughts, characterizing past and future drought hazards, impacts, and have received increasing attention. Importantly, the extent vulnerabilities, followed by a gap analysis reviewing current of drought impacts can be best mitigated by implementing drought response and preparedness measures to comprise drought management plans. Donald Wilhite (2012) coined the the resilience assessment. The last step is identifying and term “hydro-illogical cycle” to describe the reactive nature of prioritizing possible investments to alleviate drought risk and drought management that entails broad awareness of droughts foster resilience. The DRRA is flexible in that it allows individual only once the event has reached a critical stage and that turns applications to be tailored to different country contexts and into apathy in times of wetter periods. However, planning for builds on existing datasets, studies, analyses, and programs droughts in non-drought periods can reduce or even avoid while focusing on specific needs and priorities. Instead of impacts, minimizing physical and emotional suffering in the replicating existing methodologies and tools, the DRRA brings process (De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017). them together, fills gaps, and points implementers to suitable resources that can inform the assessment in a specific region or The World Bank has developed the DRRA as a cross-sectoral country. The objective of the DRRA is to provide a handbook for coordinating mechanism for prioritizing drought investments transitioning from reactive to proactive drought management. to help countries transition from reactive to proactive drought management. The DRRA builds on previous reports Droughts have been increasing in frequency, duration, by the World Bank and on internationally recognized concepts, and global coverage, impacting approximately 55 million such as the “three pillars approach for drought resilience”: people annually. Since 2000, drought frequency and (1) monitoring and early warning, (2) risk and impact assessment, duration have risen by a third (UNCCD 2022a). Projections and (3) risk mitigation, preparedness, and response. The DRRA indicate that land areas and populations facing extreme consolidates methodologies, such as Assessing Drought Risks droughts could increase 7–8 percent by the late 21st century and Hazards and the EPIC Response framework, to provide (Zaveri, Damania, and Engle 2023). In the last five decades, comprehensive and systematic guidance for understanding and the number of “dry shock” episodes has increased by about managing droughts. In addition, the DRRA is designed to draw 233 percent (Damania et al. 2017). Such dry spells have from and inform broader climate resilience assessments, such ramifications for many sectors of the economy, disrupt as the World Bank Climate Change and Development Reports ecosystems, and have a lasting impact on human well-being. (CCDRs) and the Adaptation and Resilience Diagnostics. In Due to their cascading and wide-ranging impacts, droughts are that it aims to identify measures to reduce drought risks and known to be the most complex and severe weather-related impacts before an event occurs, the DRRA is different from the hazard. Studies indicate that droughts are disproportionally Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA), which is conducted detrimental to the Global South and its economic growth. following a drought crisis to understand relief measures. viii DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The DRRA prioritizes investment options in the context of context, and sector specifics. Deploying an interdisciplinary and country-specific or regional capacities, impacts, vulnerabilities, intersectoral team is paramount to ensure the methodology’s and needs across a range of relevant sectors and systems. successful application and to identify suitable interventions. The DRRA will help countries assess drought risks and costs or damages (including avoided costs) to justify and prioritize This report permits users to quickly compare available investment options. analytical tools. It brings together established and often complementary tools for each DRRA sub-block (figure ES.1) This report targets task teams, sector specialists, and their and provides guidance for selecting and combining them. It client counterparts to facilitate collaborative programming references case studies illustrating implementation of each for drought resilience. Implementation of the methodology building block. requires deep knowledge of drought management, country FIGURE ES.1 Building Blocks and Sub-Blocks of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment Block I Scope coordination and capacity ■ Scope coordination within the implementing institution ■ Scope coordination between government, donors, development partners, and other stakeholders ■ Scope coordination across government Block II Assess drought risk ■ Assess current and recent drought hazards ■ Assess main trends of future drought hazards ■ Assess current and recent drought impacts ■ Assess country/region vulnerability to drought Block III Evaluate current resilience ■ Evaluate current drought response ■ Evaluate current drought preparedness Block IV Prioritize areas for action ■ Prioritize measures to reduce drought risks and increase drought resilience Source: Original figure for this publication. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ix EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The DRRA is embedded in its regional and institutional context, Understanding hazard characteristics and trends of future defining its success. A preliminary participatory scoping droughts lays the foundation for informed decision- exercise determines in which context a DRRA is conducted. making. A DRRA may start with an analysis of historical or First, the scoping must consider the collaboration and interest current drought hazard metrics and thus look at precipitation, of local agencies and various sectors’ stakeholders in upgrading evapotranspiration, flows, vegetation conditions, soil drought management. It must then judge the readiness and moisture, and other parameters. The analysis is followed by capacity of ongoing government, donor and stakeholder an assessment of future drought hazards, including climate engagement and coordination in the given country. Organizing change projections. Due to the complexity and multifaceted a workshop that brings relevant external and internal, as well as nature of droughts, use of several indices and indicators is cross-sectoral, stakeholders to the table can ensure inclusivity recommended to characterize drought hazards. The DRRA and understanding of both challenges and opportunities. The framework offers four approaches: (1) using the data and workshop is helpful in identifying existing work and studies knowledge from an established drought monitoring system in that can inform the assessment while avoiding duplication of the country/region, (2) relying on drought portals that provide efforts. The outcome of this scoping exercise (block I) will lay temporal maps of indices, (3) working with preprocessed the groundwork for and set the direction of the DRRA and will indices served in web portals, and (4) constructing indices with align priorities for and expectations regarding implementation on-the-ground information from local agencies. The selection objectives. Furthermore, as the first building block of the DRRA, of approaches will depend on data availability, resources this exercise ensures stakeholder involvement, buy-in, and allocation, and time constraints. Where drought monitoring ownership, which are essential for its success. systems do not exist, their establishment is recommended. For example, Brazil developed a drought monitoring system that Comparing hazard characteristics with knowledge of drought measures indicators on a monthly basis, and depending on impacts and vulnerabilities reveals drought risk hotspots that pre-defined thresholds, helps trigger specific actions. inform prioritization of efforts and resource allocation. Drought risk results not only from hazards, but also from exposure and Drought impacts evolve gradually and are thus often not vulnerability. Generally, the risk of drought causing damage immediately evident. Droughts affect all economic sectors, and socioeconomic/ecological losses reflects the severity and individuals, communities, society as a whole, and various probability of occurrence, exposure, and vulnerability (Vogt et ecosystems. Their impacts can range from stunting due to al. 2018; Limones et al. 2020). By conducting a drought risk malnutrition, to the death of hundreds of dolphins in the Amazon assessment (block II), teams can identify where the drought due to low water flows, to community anxiety associated with hazard is most significant and the areas and sectors that water shortages and failing crops. Unless the DRRA has a are the most vulnerable to drought. The DRRA emphasizes clear sectoral focus, all potential drought impacts should be understanding of drought risk and recommends a thorough assessed. Knowledge of these impacts reveals drought risk assessment of each of the elements of overall risk, as dictated by hotspots and vulnerabilities that inform the prioritization of data and information availability, as well as time and resources. efforts and resource allocation. Information on drought impacts The recommended methods are (1) qualitative risk assessments, can be gained through drought impact chain identification, (2) empirical semi-quantitative assessments, and (3) data- estimation of drought macroeconomic impacts, human impact driven quantitative assessments. The World Bank conducted a assessments, PDNA/Damage and Loss Assessments, or simply machine learning-based, data-driven drought risk assessment a review of an existing impact database or monitoring system in Romania that applied the European Commission’s EDORA in the country. Additional tools and methodologies for drought Framework to show how drought hazards can lead to impacts, impact assessments range from established impact database to identify thresholds-of-hazard indices that trigger impacts in monitoring systems in the country or region to remote sensing- different sectors, and to determine the likelihood of respective based analyses. anomalies being experienced due to drought. x DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A high level of vulnerability to drought threatens livelihoods drought preparedness mechanisms, (2) in-depth assessment and capacity to meet the most basic needs. Although drought of drought management plans and climate adaptation impacts are felt across society, impacts manifest to varying actions, and (3) identification of key program areas around degrees, depending on the level of vulnerability. Vulnerability which to prioritize investments relevant to drought. The EPIC can be understood as a system’s susceptibility to and inability Response framework provides a template to identify the to handle the adverse effects of drought. The DRRA should relevant stakeholders and program areas while gauging their include an assessment of vulnerability, which aims to determine level of development and effectiveness. To identify drought what causes risk and how it is managed. By indicating areas with investments, drought risks (block ll) must be mapped against the highest needs, this assessment will inform prioritization of the current level of drought resilience and challenges facing drought responses and preparedness measures. King-Okumu the current drought management system (block lll). (2019) categorizes vulnerability assessments as one of three types: (1) people-centered, (2) land-based mapping and models Systematically assessing the benefits of drought investment of ecosystem-service production, or (3) hydrometeorological options permits the efficient allocation of limited resources to assessments, including water balance accounting. The DRRA areas where they can make the most significant impact. The provides a comprehensive overview of ways vulnerability can DRRA results in a list of evaluated and prioritized investment be evaluated. options to mitigate drought risk and build resilience (block IV). To properly assess investment options, the long-term benefits of Investments in drought preparedness and pre-arranged a program or project must be weighed against costs. Assessing drought responses maximize risk management and the benefits entails comparing project outcomes with expected resilience. Notably, drought-risk assessment toolkits, drought impacts in the business-as-usual scenario. approaches, and methodologies rarely account for current drought response and preparedness and how these systems This report is intended to guide collaborative program can be best upgraded, thereby missing the resilience development. The report will be updated to reflect lessons from dimension. Approaches to resilience assessment (block III) DRRA implementation in various country and regional contexts. include (1) desk-based stock-taking of drought response and World Bank DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY xi A B B R E V I AT I O N S Abbreviations AgBMPs Agricultural Best Management Practices IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change A&R Adaptation and Resilience Diagnostic JRC Joint Research Centre BACI Benefits of Action and Costs of Inaction KNMI Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute (Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut) BCA Benefit-Cost Analysis MoM Menu of Measures CCDR Country Climate and Development Report NbS Nature-Based Solutions CMIP6 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 NEX-GDDP- Earth Exchange Global Daily Downscaled CMIP6 NASA Projections CMU Country Management Unit OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination CORDEX Coordinated Regional Downscaling of Humanitarian Affairs Experiment OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation DALA Damage and Loss Assessment and Development DEWS Drought Early Warning Systems PDNA Post-Disaster Needs Assessment DMDU Decision-Making Under Deep Uncertainty PESTEL Political, Economic, Social, Technological, DRAMP Drought Resilience, Adaptation and Legal, and Environment Management Policy SDHI Standardized Drought Hazard Indices DRRA Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment SPEI Standard Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index EC European Commission SPI Standard Precipitation Index EDORA European Drought Observatory for Resilience SROI Social Return on Investment and Adaptation SUDS Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems EM-DAT Emergency Event Database UN United Nations ES Ecosystem Services UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat EU European Union Desertification FAO Food and Agriculture Organization UNDP United Nations Development Programme GEE Google Earth Engine WBCA Weighted Benefit-Cost Analysis GFDRR Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and WCRP World Climate Research Programme Recovery WEI Water Exploitation Index GWP Global Water Partnership WHE Water Harvesting Explorer HRNA Human Recovery Needs Assessment WRI World Resources Institute IDMP Integrated Drought Management Programme WSD Water Security Diagnostic IHSN International Household Survey Network xii DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1. Introduction: Understanding Drought Disaster Management and Existing Approaches 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S 1.1 Droughts Are Complex and who witnessed large dry shocks in infancy are more likely to suffer long-term health impacts reaching into adulthood and to Often Ignored for Too Long have an increased likelihood of being stunted. In Sub-Saharan Africa, it is estimated that more than 35 percent of children Although droughts pose significant risks to the economy, under the age of five are stunted (Damania et al. 2017). society, and ecosystems, their impacts are not easily assessed, and many actual losses are unaccounted for. Against the Drought impacts are felt across ecosystems, such as freshwater backdrop of climate change and population growth, droughts and coastal ecosystems, which suffer from reduced water exacerbate existing strains on water resources. Smirnov et al. flows. A drought in the Amazon led to the death of hundreds (2016) attribute 60 percent of the projected increase in drought of dolphins in 2023 (Santos de Lima et al. 2024). Despite their exposure to climate change, 9 percent to population growth, magnitude, the effects of drought are often under-reported and 31 percent to the interaction of the two. and ignored, translating into slowly unfolding disasters that can grow into full-fledged emergencies across sectors and Dry episodes have been increasing in both frequency and global segments of economies (Staupe-Delgado 2019). Drought coverage. Drought frequency and duration have risen by a third does not elicit the same immediate response from the public since 2000. Globally, an estimated 55 million people a year or motivate as much political action as other natural disasters. are affected by droughts (UNCCD 2022a). In 2022, the United Given their slow onset and wide-ranging and cascading Nations (UN) warned that approximately 22 million people in the impacts, droughts are often considered the most complex and Horn of Africa were at risk of starvation (Rodella, Zaveri, and severe weather-related hazard. Bertone 2023). Empirical estimates show that droughts have a disproportionate impact on developing countries and their Droughts can be characterized as meteorological, agricultural, economic growth. Zaveri et al. (2023) found that droughts reduce hydrological, environmental, or socioeconomic droughts gross domestic product growth per capita between 0.39 percent and can have distinct characteristics and implications across and 0.85 percent, on average. Projections indicate that land sectors.1 The sectors suffering directly or indirectly during areas and populations facing extreme droughts could increase droughts include agricultural production, water supply, 7–8 percent by the late 21st century (Zaveri, Damania, and energy production, transportation and tourism, human health, Engle 2023). In the last five decades, the number of dry shock biodiversity, and natural ecosystems. Crucially, drought episodes has increased by about 233 percent (Damania et al. risks and the indices and (geo)statistical analyses used to 2017). Climate models project an upward trend in the occurrence understand these risks may differ significantly, depending on of heat and drought events, which will cause production losses the primary concern, whether it be public health, agriculture and tree mortality. Widespread incidents of food insecurity and and crop losses, water supply, hydropower, manufacturing and malnutrition have already increased in Africa and in Central and industries, or something else. South America (IPCC 2022). Figure 1.1 depicts the full cycle of disaster risk management Although drought events made up 6 percent of all the disasters incorporating both risk and crisis management elements. Box 1.1 that occurred between 1970 and 2019, they caused 7 percent describes some of the most relevant terms used throughout of reported economic losses and accounted for 34 percent this report. of all reported deaths (WMO 2021). In the same period, more than 90 percent of climate-related deaths occurred in the Additional concepts not included in box 1.1 include flash global south (UNCCD 2022a). Women who experienced large droughts and “precipitation/evaporation sheds.” Although these dry shocks in their infancy are 29 percent more likely to have concepts are not a focus of this report, they can impact water children suffering from anthropometric failure. In turn, children availability and are thus briefly outlined in box 1.2. 2 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N A G E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R O A C H E S FIGURE 1.1 Cycle of Disaster Risk Management Risk management Proactive Prediction and Preparedness early warning Mitigation Disaster Protection Recovery Reconstruction Impact assessment Recovery Response Crisis management Reactive Source: Adapted from De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017. BOX 1.1 Drought-Related Terms Used in this Report DROUGHT: Period of abnormally dry weather sufficiently prolonged to cause a serious hydrological imbalance (WMO 1992). ARIDITY: When precipitation is insufficient for maintaining vegetation, an area is considered arid. Aridity is measured by comparing long-term water supply (precipitation) with long-term average water demand (evapotranspiration) (Cap-Net et al. 2020). WATER SCARCITY: An imbalance between the supply and demand of freshwater in a specified domain (country, region, catchment, river basin, and so on) as a result of a high rate of demand compared with available supply, under prevailing institutional arrangements and infrastructural conditions (FAO 2012). WATER SHORTAGE: A shortage of water supply of an acceptable quality; low levels of water supply, at a given place and a given time, relative to design supply levels. The shortage may arise from climatic factors or other causes. For a comparison of definitions related to water shortages see figure B1.1 (FAO 2012). (box continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S BOX 1.1 (continued) VULNERABILITY: The degree to which a system is susceptible to, or unable to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and extremes (Nakicenovic et al. 2000). Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed, the system’s sensitivity, and the system’s adaptive capacity. Vulnerability is often understood as the opposite of resilience. REACTIVE DROUGHT MANAGEMENT: A reactive approach to drought management is equivalent to crisis management: it includes relief measures and actions taken after the start of a drought event. This approach is adopted in emergency situations and can lead to inefficient technical and economic solutions caused by time constraints that inhibit a thorough evaluation of options and stakeholder participation. Reactive drought management does little to reduce drought impacts caused by future drought events (Vogt et al. 2018). PROACTIVE DROUGHT MANAGEMENT: A proactive approach to drought risk management includes the design, with stakeholder participation, of appropriate measures and related planning tools in advance. The proactive approach is based on both short-term and long-term measures and includes monitoring systems for a timely warning of drought conditions, identification of the most vulnerable members of the population, and tailored measures to mitigate drought risk and improve preparedness. The proactive approach entails the planning of necessary measures to prevent or minimize drought impacts in advance. Proactive drought management is FIGURE B1.1.1 reflected in the three pillars of integrated Types of Water Shortages Based on Context drought management (Vogt et al. 2018). and Driving Forces RESILIENCE: IPCC (2023) defines Context resilience as “The capacity of Temporary water imbalances Permanent deficiencies interconnected social, economic and ecological systems to cope with a hazardous event, trend or disturbance, (Environmental transformation) Natural responding or reorganizing in ways Drought Aridity that maintain their essential function, identity and structure. Resilience is a positive attribute when it maintains Process capacity for adaptation, learning and/or transformation.” Man-made The Integrated Drought Management Water shortages Desertification Programme provides a glossary of drought-related terms.a a Integrated Drought Management Programme, “Glossary,” https://www.droughtmanagement. info/find/glossary/. Source: Adapted from Karavitis et al. 2014. 4 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N A G E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R O A C H E S BOX 1.2 How Flash Droughts and Precipitation/Evaporationsheds Impact Water Availability CLIMATE CHANGE WILL FUEL THE FREQUENCY OF FLASH DROUGHTS Droughts are typically characterized as disasters in slow motion, distinguishing them from other types of disasters, specifically rapid-onset events such as floods. Recently, flash droughts, such as one in 2012 in the United States that caused more than US$30 billion in economic losses (Yuan et al. 2023), have garnered attention. Flash droughts are characterized by their rapid onset, challenging drought monitoring and forecasting, as well as the implementation of drought mitigation measures. Otkin et al. (2018) proposed that flash droughts be defined on the basis of the rate of intensification at which they unfold, which can be a matter of weeks. Flash droughts often develop when below-average precipitation is followed by elevated evaporation caused by high temperatures, low humidity, strong winds, sunny skies, and decreased soil moisture (see figure B1.2.1). A combination of these conditions can result in the rapid development of flash droughts, which could develop into other types of droughts, such as hydrological or agricultural droughts, or which could trigger and interact with compound extreme events, such as heat waves or wildfires. FIGURE B1.2.1 Climatic Conditions Leading to Flash Droughts Dry lower atmosphere Low Prolonged, warm to precipitation hot temperatures, High clear skies evaporative Low demand evaporative Heating from surface demand moderated by soil Dry and hot surface moisture availability conditions and lack of moisture devastate crops Lack of Extreme heat Soil moisture Low Increase in heating precipitation cuts increases depletes rapidly evapotranspiration from surface o moisture supply evapotranspiration Source: Adapted from Parker and Gallant 2021. Climate change contributes to a rising risk of flash drought occurrences and, thus, to the frequency of impacts felt across society, ecosystems, and the economy. The agriculture sector is especially impacted by flash droughts, and projections show that cropland areas affected by flash droughts will increase across all continents (Christian et al. 2023). (box continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S BOX 1.2 (continued) Christian et al. (2023) indicate that flash drought frequency will increase on a global level with greater fossil fuel use and higher radiative forcing. In addition, elevated risks of flash droughts over cropland have been reported. Finally, studies indicate that in addition to occurrence, both the duration and severity of flash droughts will increase; precipitation decreases are combined with greater flash drought frequency in the Amazon, Iberian Peninsula, and Anatolia (Christian et al. 2023). Furthermore, a review of drought events between 1951 and 2014 indicates that sub-seasonal droughts, influenced by anthropogenic climate change, have developed faster and transitioned globally to flash droughts (Yuan et al. 2023). ATMOSPHERIC WATERSHEDS CONNECT REGIONS THROUGH FLOWS OF WATER VAPOR Understanding and sustainably managing water resources usually involves studying the water cycle and hydrology within a specific country, river basin, or watershed. Key parameters for assessing the status of water resources in a given system include precipitation, evapotranspiration, surface runoff, and changes to water storage. This sometimes involves looking at green and blue water balances. However, moisture and water vapor can move across watersheds, thereby creating water flows that connect different basins and watersheds. To fully capture impacts on water availability in a given location, researchers must consider atmospheric water flows need alongside basin-level water balances. Researchers call atmospheric watersheds “precipitationsheds” and “evaporationsheds” (see figure B1.2.2). The former refers to regions that are sources of precipitation; the latter describes regions that receive that precipitation. This land-atmosphere feedback across basins needs to be better understood (Rockström et al. 2023; Wang-Erlandsson et al. 2018). FIGURE B1.2.2 Precipitationsheds and Evaporationsheds Evaporation Terrestrial surface Flow Terrestrial source area Precipitation Local recycling n Sink regio ed nsh Oceanic io tat Oceanic source area cipi surface Pre Source: Keys et al. 2012. 6 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N A G E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R O A C H E S Drought impacts depend significantly on systemic vulnerabilities, interventions. Nevertheless, there are increasing calls for a which are intricate and nonlinear even within one society paradigm shift from reactive drought management to proactive or ecosystem. For instance, in arid and semi-arid regions, drought management. ecosystems and human activities may develop adaptations to limited water availability. Agriculture, lifestyle, and infrastructure A well-established methodology that supports management in these regions are typically designed to cope with low rainfall, of drought impacts is the Post-Disaster Needs Assessment but they usually have a narrower margin than wet areas for (PDNA), jointly developed by the European Union, the World maneuvering due to dryness, and deficits can eventually lead Bank, and the United Nations Development Programme to water shortages. Conversely, regions that usually receive (UNDP). Crucially, PDNAs provide a comprehensive and adequate rainfall have a larger water margin overall, which standardized methodology for assessing impacts and recovery, can provide a buffer against immediate shortages. However, avoiding situations in which, historically, several assessments these regions may lack the adaptive practices necessary to were undertaken in parallel. PDNAs are conducted right after handle prolonged or severe droughts, possibly leading to more disasters occur and gather information regarding impacts, economic and social disruptions during exceptional droughts response measures, and recovery costs (EU, UNDG, and World compared with regions where dryness is the norm. Some Bank 2013). drought-prone, well-organized societies are currently capable of maintaining functionality and stability and transforming PDNAs are effective in quickly evaluating the impact, potentially catastrophic droughts into manageable scenarios. vulnerability, and economic aspects of disasters, facilitating In contrast, others lacking preparedness can experience immediate relief measures. However, PDNAs conducted shortly exacerbated drought effects, leading to deepened vulnerability after events cannot consider lagged, indirect, compounded, or and severe disruptions. In general, the way equally intense long-term impacts. Not all stages of a drought event cycle can droughts may cause different impacts depending on the context be considered in a PDNA (see figure 1.2). Because PDNAs focus highlights the challenge of understanding the phenomenon. on immediate action, they are not a tool to build cross-sectoral drought preparedness and resilience. Furthermore, PDNAs Another challenge is that drought impacts can be direct or embrace a relatively rigid application, and their time constraints indirect and short term or long term (Cap-Net et al. 2020). hinder tailoring to individual country needs or contexts (EC, Additionally, impact assessments often focus on direct effects. GFDRR, and UN 2018). Secondary and indirect impacts may be equally important but pose difficulties for quantification (Eckhardt, Leiras, and Thomé 2018). 1.2 Many Solutions Exist Historically, droughts have been overlooked empirically and for Proactive Drought conceptually, and their management has been largely reactive Management in nature (Staupe-Delgado 2019). Donald Wilhite (2012) refers The most successful approach to managing droughts is by to this crisis management approach as the “hydro-illogical cycle.” One reason for the slow uptake of a more proactive transitioning from crisis management or a reactive response drought management approach is the low political salience to a risk management or proactive response. Preparedness and perceived severity of a disaster that builds over time and reduces costs through mitigation of the social, economic, and whose impacts can be protracted, geographically dispersed, or environmental impacts that drought would otherwise have both. Sudden-onset disasters are perceived as representative caused, and it increases resilience to future droughts (Serrat- of all types of disasters, and the majority of disaster-related Capdevila et al. 2022). Proactive drought management also research focuses on understanding and evaluating them reduces risks while increasing social capacity to address them. (Staupe-Delgado 2019). Countries often lack clear frameworks Planning for droughts in non-drought periods can reduce and, for identifying and implementing prevention and response in some cases, even avoid impacts, minimizing physical and DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 7 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S emotional suffering (De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017). when planning for and prioritizing drought management Furthermore, integrated approaches for addressing climatic interventions. NbS often entail lower initial investments extremes, specifically droughts, support most of the than engineered solutions and can reduce long-term costs Sustainable Development Goals (Cap-Net et al. 2020). Finally, by naturally enhancing ecosystem services and mitigating nature-based solutions (NbS) are an important consideration drought impacts (box 1.3). FIGURE 1.2 Stages of a Drought Event Drought condition (Conceptual consideration) Drought event (Operational consideration) Drought indices threshold Precipitation Onset Drought event Recovery Drought end point Intensification Persistent ■ Abnormally dry (Level 0) ■ Moderate (Level 1–2) ■ Level 2–4 drought ■ Meteorological indices ■ Agricultural and natural have returned to normal ecosystem productivity ■ Soil moisture levels ■ Some crop and pasture ■ Water shortages, crop returns to average are low, crop and damage damage and fires are ■ Soil moisture is restored pre-drought conditions pasture growth delayed widespread in cultivated land ■ Fire risk moderate ■ Lake and reservoir levels ■ Water alerts are issued to high ■ Fire risk high to extreme ■ Pasture growth return to average re-establishes ■ Water conservation ■ Socioeconomic impacts pre-drought conditions measures activated are moderate ■ Reservoirs and lakes ■ Socioeconomic conditions: refill ■ Socioeconomic impacts Do they return when are mild to moderate the drought ends? In some cases we hit a “new normal” Source: Adapted from Howard et al. 2021. 8 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N A G E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R O A C H E S BOX 1.3 Nature-Based Solutions Are Integral for Integrated Drought Risk Management Nature-based solutions (NbS) are a crucial element in the pursuit of drought resilience and climate change adaptation (Zaveri, Damania, and Engle 2023). Importantly, these solutions need to be considered as both complementary and possible substitutes for existing management and infrastructure investments. They are ideally positioned within an integrated set of solutions. Although NbS do not generate water, some NbS, such as reforestation, can impact precipitation patterns and atmospheric moisture recycling. NbS can influence natural processes for the redistribution of water over time and space within a watershed. Broadly, NbS for climate risk mitigation are categorized as (1) protection of intact landscapes, (2) management of working lands, and (3) restoration of high-value habitats.a More specifically, these solutions can include interventions related to targeted habitat protection, agricultural/ranching/forestry best management practices, artificial wetlands, native revegetation, natural and hybrid surface interventions, sub-surface and groundwater storage interventions, wetland restoration, floodplain and river restoration, and riparian restoration (Vigerstol et al. 2023). Detailed ecological and hydrological assessments are essential, particularly for vegetation or localized storage interventions, which might further reduce streamflow during droughts or create unintended negative consequences downstream. Assessing and quantifying the benefits of NbS to mitigate droughts is generally challenging but should not lead practitioners to favor grey infrastructure investments over green or green-grey solutions. Integrating NbS in broader programs can drastically increase these investments’ overall impacts. DRRA application should avoid building institutional or regulatory barriers to implementation of NbS (Van Zanten et al. 2023). Appendix B presents an overview of some NbS that could increase water security and mitigate drought risk. a Measuring the impact of drought on wildlife species remains a significant scientific challenge, even in developed countries. This difficulty underscores a substantial gap in current understanding of ecological responses to drought conditions. Wildlife species often exhibit complex and varied responses to drought, influenced by a multitude of factors including habitat type, species-specific water dependencies, and ecosystem interactions. Traditional monitoring techniques frequently fall short in capturing these nuanced dynamics, necessitating the development of more sophisticated methods and technologies. Advancements in remote sensing, coupled with comprehensive field studies, could offer more accurate and granular insights into how droughts affect wildlife populations and their habitats. The three pillars of integrated drought management are Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR) and the World Bank have reflected in most proactive drought management frameworks. developed an implementation guide for assessing drought As depicted in figure 1.3, integrated drought management hazards and risks. Although it is not built around the three in accordance with the three pillars includes (1) monitoring pillars, the guide promotes four guiding principles for and early warning systems, (2) vulnerability and impact drought risk assessments: (1) a system-scale perspective, assessments, and (3) identification and implementation of (2) assessment of droughts in relation to their impacts, (3) 2 drought mitigation and preparedness measures. understanding that drought risk changes over time, and (4) the idea that effective drought management increases resilience In addition to the abovementioned integrated drought and enhance preparedness. management approach, the Global Facility for Disaster DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 9 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S FIGURE 1.3 Three Pillars of Effective Drought Management as Developed by the Integrated Drought Management Programme Feedback Monitoring and Vulnerability early warning and impact assessment SUCCESSFUL DROUGHT POLICY ack eed F b ed ac b Fe k Mitigation, preparedness and response Source: Adapted from Cap-Net et al. 2020. This framework is flexible and is specifically tailored to and floods). Numerous program areas are organized into responding to drought disaster needs (see figure 1.4) with just- five key elements that form the basis of the framework: (1) in-time to sector-specific or regional solutions (World Bank enabling environment, (2) planning at multiple and nested 2019). It was developed alongside a catalogue of drought geographical levels, (3) investing in healthy watersheds and hazard and risk tools, a global inventory (Deltares 2017) of these water infrastructure, (4) controlling water use and development, tools, and a comparative assessment report (Deltares 2018). and (5) responding better to hydro-climatic risks (Browder et al. However, this collection of resources focuses narrowly on 2021; Crossman 2018). drought risk assessments while providing limited guidance on drought management and resilience-building practices. Appendix A presents a more detailed comparison of complementary tools for the DRRA, elaborating on synergies The importance of integrated approaches to drought made possible and gaps filled by the DRRA. These tools management is further elaborated in the EPIC Response comprise the drought risk assessment developed by GFDRR, framework developed by the World Bank and Deltares. This the EPIC Response framework, the Climate Change and collection of programs supports creation of an effective Development Reports (CCDRs), and the Adaptation and governance system to manage hydro-climatic risks (droughts Resilience Diagnostic. 10 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY FIGURE 1.4 Drought Risk Assessment Implementation Guide Developed by the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery 1. Scoping phase 2. Inception phase 3. Assessment phase 4. Implementation phase Problem definition Preliminary assessment Detailed assessment, necessary when answered ‘NO’ to question in 2f The action to take depends on the answer to questions 1a and 1b 1a. What is the problem 2a. Collect basic historical drought impact information 3a. Detailed characterisation and context? for the sectors identified in 1c i) of current drought hazard ii) Detailed assessment 4a. Identify just-in-time A of current drought if answered ‘short term (current)’ exposure and actions to mitigate the 2b. Identify relevant drought hazard, exposure and to question 1e, but no drought impact of a (forecasted) 1b. What is the objective conditions prevail in the area at vulnerability for the of the assessment? vulnerability indices; and appropriate time scale the time of the study. Use indices sectors identified in 1c drought, activate Standard for the sectors identified in 1c B identified in 2b. Include an E Operating Procedures analysis on climate variability if (SOPs) 1c. What sectors need this is necessary from 2c to be included? 2c. Assess if drought in the area of interest is linked to F, G, H for the sectors identified in 1c For an overview of global climatic patterns such as El Niño–Southern 3b. possible sectors, see Oscillation (ENSO) C i) Detailed characterisation ii) Detailed assessment Section 2.1 of ‘ongoing’ drought of ‘ongoing’ drought 4b. Design drought risk 2d. Assess climate change and socio-economic hazard if answered ‘short term exposure and reduction measures (e.g. 1d. What spatial scale? (current)’ to question 1e and vulnerability for the social protection systems, - local predictions/outlooks for the area of interest drought conditions prevail in the if answered ‘long term (future)’ to question 1e D sectors identified in 1c increased surface and - (sub)national area at the time of the study. Use E groundwater storage, - regional indices identified in 2b. Include - global 2e. Collect and analyse global and/or local readily an analysis on climate variability irrigation systems) if this is necessary from 2c available drought hazard, exposure, and F, G, H 1e. What time horizon? vulnerability data 3c. 4c. Design preparedness - short term (current) at the appropriate spatial and temporal scale (1d and 2b) Assess future drought Detailed assessment - drought conditions A i) ii) of future drought measures (e.g. drought hazard prevail at time of study if answered ‘long term (future)’ to exposure and monitoring, drought (ongoing) 2f. Is the information collected and analyzed in the question 1e. Use indices identified detection/forecasting - long term (future) vulnerability inception phase (2) sufficient to meet the in 2b. Include an analysis on for the sectors identified in systems, early warning objectives of the drought assessment as defined in future climate variability if this is E necessary from 2c 1c systems, establish SOPs) the scoping phase (1)? F, G, H Identify possible NO YES 4d. Define and implement 1f. implementation 3d. Combine current and/or future drought hazard, drought management Go to phase 3. Go to phase 4. actions/measures Assessment phase Implementation exposure and vulnerability for an overall assessment plans and operational and required outputs (detailed assessment) phase of drought risk rules (see phase 4) for the sectors identified in 1c Approaches, data, tools and models to support drought assessment A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. Drought Drought hazard, Link to global Climate change and Local drought Detailed hazard Software or Case-specific drought catalogue and exposure and climatic patterns socio-economic impact data information modelling tools indices for hazard inventory (*) vulnerability The website predictions/ Local ministries and Satellite based The drought characterisation Contains an indices https://iri.columbi outlooks government products (e.g. NDVI inventory provides Case-specific drought overview of Table 3-1 a.edu/our- The website http://ar5- agencies, hydro- maps) provide info to an overview of indices (B) are available global provides a expertise/climate/ syr.ipcc.ch meteorological characterize past and software and calculated to or regional online compendium of enso/ provides provides the most services and/or ongoing droughts. modelling tools for characterise current/ drought drought indices global images recent assessment NGOs provide local Modelled meteo- drought assessment. ongoing/future platforms, for different showing areas report of IPCC. A data on exposure and/or hydrological A model tailored to droughts based on bulletins and types of with El Niño and summary report for and vulnerability variables provide info the assessment will readily available online datasets, with droughts and La Niña policymakers is data, losses and to characterise provide simulation datasets, measured or information on affected sectors. Teleconnections, included. The website damages to sectors past/ongoing and results of variables modelled variables hazard, impact, and ENSO Rainfall https://tntcat.iiasa.ac.at resulting from past future droughts. appropriate to How? See the indices See also the exposure and drought Teleconnection /SspDb provides an and ongoing See drought characterise the description in the drought vulnerability catalogue(*) Maps explanation of the SSPs. droughts catalogue(*) drought catalogue(*) Source: World Bank 2019. xiii Note: Letters at the bottom right of the phase boxes refer to the orange boxes at the bottom of the figure. ENSO = El Niño Southern Oscillation; IPCC = Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; NGO = nongovernmental organization; SSP = Shared Socioeconomic Pathways. * www.droughtcatalogue.com DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 11 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N AG E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R OAC H E S 1.3 Why DRRAs Are Needed DRRAs are of interest to professionals working on initiatives in sectors such as water resources management, agriculture, and How They Are Organized climate change, and disaster risk management, and they represent an opportunity to link human development This report elaborates on all the building blocks of a proactive, with disaster management efforts and to embed drought risk-based assessment of drought management needs management within existing World Bank country programs and and opportunities. Instead of developing a completely new initiatives. This report is, therefore, written primarily for task approach, it organizes already-established tools, frameworks, teams and sector specialists, as well as their client counterparts, and methodologies—including the PDNA methodology, the to facilitate collaborative programming for drought resilience. three pillars, the GFDRR’s risk assessment implementation guide, and the EPIC Response framework—into four building Generally, DRRAs can be prepared as standalone assessments blocks that consist of several sub-blocks. The list of tools or can complement a broader ecosystem of evaluation tools, presented within each block is not exhaustive. such as Water Security Diagnostic studies and CCDRs, that collectively contribute to informed investments and robust It is important to acknowledge prior drought tool consolidation drought resilience strategies. efforts. The drought toolbox from the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification is just one exemplary effort, based DRRAs, encompassing current program evaluation, gaps, on the three pillars, to consolidate drought management tools and upgrade analyses, can be undertaken through a sectoral and methods. Other tool compilations include the Flood and lens. Even though the significance of the risk is better Drought Portal (DHI 2023) and Flood and Drought Management understood if multiple sectors and systems are integrated into Tools.3 In addition, Deltares developed, in conjunction with assessments, the presented framework allows for a targeted GFDRR’s drought hazard and risk assessment guide (World sectoral focus. The flexible nature of the approach permits a Bank 2019), a catalogue of drought-specific hazard and risk tailored exploration of sector-specific nuances, facilitating a tools.4 The DRRA does not reiterate but instead links the granular understanding of drought risks. Appendix C presents content of these collections and initiatives, referencing relevant questions to guide DRRA implementation. toolboxes and databases and explaining how their use can be further complemented (see figure 1.5). The DRRA is supported by and was developed in conjunction with a Menu of Measures (MoM), which is based on the program The DRRA’s structure permits users to quickly compare areas defined in the EPIC Response framework and organizes available tools and select the most appropriate options for their measures alongside these areas (see figure 4.2 in block lll). The purpose. The DRRA provides guidance on approaches suitable MoM does not just list potential measures to improve drought for different application cases, depending on country capacity, preparedness; it provides additional resources and examples data availability, resources allocated to complete the exercise, of projects that illustrate these options. Specifically, for blocks and level of engagement and demand for the assessment. III and IV, the MoM creates the context in which programs in the drought management system are identified and then evaluated. The proposed methodology provides solutions for actors This report’s MoM reflects the EPIC Response framework for preparing for, experiencing, or in the wake of a drought. Proactive the purpose of ensuring links and consistency with existing and comprehensive approaches to DRRA are encouraged, but frameworks applied within and outside of the World Bank. It is when actors are facing an unfolding drought without plans, a not an exhaustive list of potential drought resilience-building more rapid and less resource-intensive version of the DRRA measures but rather a complement to other lists identifying can be implemented. Furthermore, the presented solutions such measures. allow actors to address different types of droughts at different jurisdictional levels and with various sectoral emphases. 12 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 1 . I N T R O D U C T I O N : U N D E R S TA N D I N G D R O U G H T D I S A S T E R M A N A G E M E N T A N D E X I S T I N G A P P R O A C H E S In the following chapters of this report, each building block and a DRRA including the activities described in this report is initiated sub-block of the DRRA is elaborated, illustrated with case studies, only at the request of a client government and requires the and underpinned by a list of available methodologies. Importantly, government’s ownership/leadership for implementation. FIGURE 1.5 Building Blocks and Sub-blocks of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment Block I Scope coordination and capacity ■ Scope coordination within the implementing institution ■ Scope coordination between government, donors, development partners, and other stakeholders ■ Scope coordination across government Block II Assess drought risk ■ Assess current and recent drought hazards ■ Assess main trends of future drought hazards ■ Assess current and recent drought impacts ■ Assess country/region vulnerability to drought Block III Evaluate current resilience ■ Evaluate current drought response ■ Evaluate current drought preparedness Block IV Prioritize areas for action ■ Prioritize measures to reduce drought risks and increase drought resilience Source: Original figure for this publication. Notes 1 National Drought Mitigation Center, “Types of Drought,” https://drought.unl.edu/Education/DroughtIn-depth/TypesofDrought.aspx. 2 Integrated Drought Management Programme, “The Three Pillars of Drought Management,” https://www.droughtmanagement.info/pillars/. 3 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, “Drought Toolbox,” accessed June 11, 2023, https://www.unccd.int/land-and-life/drought/toolbox. 4 IW:LEARN, “Flood & Drought Management Tools,” accessed June 11, 2023, https://fdmt.iwlearn.org/. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 13 2. Scoping Coordination and Capacity (Block I) 14 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 2 . S C O P I N G C O O R D I N AT I O N A N D C A PA C I T Y ( B L O C K I ) I nitiating a DRRA requires understanding of the context by the World Bank. By highlighting gaps and duplications, this in which it will be applied. A quick scoping exercise to assessment will set the stage for more seamless coordination determine whether the DRRA will be successful is essential of donors, government entities, and development partners, and can include, inter alia, existing internal and external and for an integrated and cohesive approach to DRRA initiatives, capacities, available resources, and commitment. implementation. Involving local agencies and stakeholders The information gathered will provide important insights into from various sectors in the assessment can foster a sense of the selection of tools based on time, resources, and capacity. ownership and commitment, which is important for a realistic For optimal allocation of resources and efforts, the context and ground-based DRRA. scoping allows teams to draw on synergies from related activities while being able to inform others. Generally, this check entails a review of (1) the implementing institution’s internal This chapter describes application of block I of the DRRA coordination, (2) government, donor, development partner, and by the World Bank and, therefore, uses World Bank other stakeholder coordination, and (3) coordination across terminology. Importantly, DRRAs are not exclusively developed for World Bank operations. Block l can be government (see figure 2.1). adapted to the needs and structures of the respective implementing institution/entity—be it a country or a donor. A readiness assessment will identify both World Bank sectors and entities involved in drought-related efforts in the country or region of interest and relevant initiatives and programs in that country or region that are not led, supported, or coordinated 2.1 Scoping Coordination within the Implementing FIGURE 2.1 Institution Block I of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: Characterization of drought hazard—the severity, frequency, duration, extent, When the World Bank is the implementing Block I entity, the DRRA begins with determination of a Country Management Unit’s (CMU) level of interest in evaluating a Scope client’s drought needs and opportunities and its readiness to coordination undertake a DRRA. If a government office is the initiating entity, and capacity it must itself assess its own internal readiness. It is essential to ascertain whether sufficient technical capacity and funding resources are or could be allocated to address drought-related ■ Scope coordination within the challenges. In addition, it is crucial to assess whether a multi- implementing institution sectoral DRRA is feasible. ■ Scope coordination between POSSIBLE RESULTS: For the World Bank, by examining government, donors, development the Country Strategy, the current country portfolio, and the partners, and other stakeholders portfolio’s performance, this part of the assessment aims to establish whether drought is genuinely regarded as a priority ■ Scope coordination across government in the CMU’s initiatives and projects and whether teams are prepared to support and budget for a DRRA. Additionally, this assessment indicates whether a DRRA could be successfully Source: Original figure for this publication. planned and implemented with the client. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 15 2 . S C O P I N G C O O R D I N AT I O N A N D C A PAC I T Y ( B LO C K I ) By evaluating the prevailing culture of the interdisciplinary comprehensive multi-sectoral DRRA to address drought- collaboration/multi-sectoral dialogues in the target country, the related challenges. It helps determine whether a DRRA is assessment aims to inform the possibility of integrated multi- achievable and to identify which sectors will collaborate on/ sectoral operations for drought resilience. Identifying obstacles lead the effort. and implementation challenges in this context helps set realistic expectations for a comprehensive DRRA. By no means is the assessment meant to critique the structure and function of the 2.2 Scoping Coordination CMU writ large. Rather, it aims to provide an initial reality check between Government, Donors, Development Partners, and regarding the operational readiness of the CMU to facilitate a DRRA and the capacity of staff across practices to prioritize time for that exercise. If a government itself is the initiating entity, the Other Stakeholders same assessments should be made of that entity. WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: This sub-block should consist of a CMU/country-level reflection Seamless coordination of the government, donors, on the feasibility of: development partners, and other stakeholders sets the stage for an integrated and cohesive approach to a DRRA, avoiding ■ Integrating DRRAs into overall strategies and operations gaps and duplications, creating traction, and ideally, resulting in a collective schedule for implementation/delivery. ■ Creating incentives for and promoting a culture of collaboration and knowledge sharing to support a DRRA POSSIBLE RESULTS: By identifying donors and development partners working on a client country’s drought- ■ Establishing clear coordination mechanisms for related matters and determining how the government is collecting (and sharing) DRRA-related information from coordinating their efforts, this part of the assessment can client agencies and partners identify gaps and overlaps, resulting in a better coordinated DRRA. This part of the assessment can be completed through ■ Creating staff training/learning opportunities to one or more workshops and bilateral meetings that engage all enhance expertise in drought assessment and multi- entities working on drought in the country. sectoral approaches Within a CMU, challenges that could hamper a DRRA include: The following actions will ensure effective coordination: ■ With the approval of the government, establish a ■ Limited expertise with the complexities of drought dedicated coordination mechanism, such as committee, and limited awareness of the need for multi-sectoral platform, or working group, to foster partnership, collaboration for DRRAs and drought management advocacy, and networking. Donors and partners should ■ Communication and information sharing gaps actively commit to sharing information and expertise. ■ Competing priorities and resource constraints ■ Formalize an agreed-on framework for donors and partners to contribute to the DRRA. The framework Within a country, a DRRA could be hampered by a complex should encompass sharing of existing resources or stakeholder landscape, that is, by stakeholders of varying relevant deliverables and should specify standardized capacities and with different levels of World Bank engagement. methodologies, data collection tools, and assessment indicators. Each participant should work with a HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING particular sector(s) in order to contribute datasets BLOCKS: This part of the assessment seeks to gauge or analyses aligned with its current engagement in the feasibility, from the implementer’s side, of planning a the country. 16 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 2 . S C O P I N G C O O R D I N AT I O N A N D C A PA C I T Y ( B L O C K I ) ■ Collectively identify funding priorities to enable POSSIBLE RESULTS: An important outcome of this part efficient allocation of resources while avoiding of the assessment, which can be completed through workshops duplication. Harmonizing funding approaches, such and meetings that engage the entire group of relevant as setting up joint funding mechanisms or collaborative sectoral agencies and stakeholders, is a map of partners and agreements, will ensure coherence and minimize governmental agencies involved in drought management. additional effort. Another important outcome: securing high-level leadership ■ Establish formal or informal monitoring mechanisms to push for cross-sectoral work and interagency cooperation. to track progress and ensure delivery of various DRRA An important message to convey to the country is that contributions, ultimately promoting accountability and managing drought is not only a water supply or agricultural strengthening drought partnerships in the country. issue. Conflicting objectives of relevant ministries can create competition and hinder coordination efforts. It is crucial to HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING work with high-level leadership actors to identify any such BLOCKS: This part of the assessment seeks to gauge the objectives. feasibility of planning a multi-donor or partnership-based comprehensive multi-sectoral DRRA to address drought-related Ideally, the country already has a data-driven, not purely challenges, and it will shape its implementation modality. That political, national steering committee or similar body is, it will help to determine whether the DRRA should be a joint responsible for tracking drought and formulating drought assessment by the World Bank and the government, a World policy and a national drought plan. Such entities often exist Bank-led assessment, or a World Bank-supported assessment. but lack functionality and actual assessment capacity. But they can facilitate dialogue and allocate funds to relevant ministries 2.3 Scoping of Coordination to support DRRA data collection. across Government On the World Bank side, clear communication of the benefits of a DRRA is essential. In that context, a high-level workshop to WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: explain the challenges, the processes, and the advantages to Involving local agencies/stakeholders from various sectors the country is recommended. It can take place before or after in the assessment process fosters a sense of ownership and the previous sub-blocks are completed or in parallel with those commitment, and it is essential for a realistic and ground-based sub-blocks. Emphasizing the benefits of better risk identification DRRA. This sub-block enables identification of potential policy and more effective targeting of resources can help garner and priority conflicts among sectors, helping to streamline policy support from the country and facilitate its active participation formulation and implementation. It can reveal a willingness or in the DRRA. capacity, or a lack thereof, to share relevant data. HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING Political commitment and country leadership are vital for the BLOCKS: This part of the assessment seeks to gauge success of the DRRA. The country must demonstrate true high- the country’s demand for and capacity to contribute to a level demand and willingness to cooperate with the World Bank comprehensive multi-sectoral DRRA. This block is aligned with or any other partner in performing a DRRA. Understanding the the spirit of the EPIC Response framework. If there is no demand country’s perspective and capacity is fundamental to deciding and lack of adequate interest to commit adequate resources to whether to go forward with the assessment or to tailor it the process, the assessment cannot be conducted. accordingly. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 17 2 . S C O P I N G C O O R D I N AT I O N A N D C A PA C I T Y ( B L O C K I ) 3. Assessing Drought Risk (Block II) 18 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) O n completion of the context scoping and readiness FIGURE 3.1 assessment (block I), the DRRA team develops a Block II of the Drought Risk and Resilience Assessment drought risk assessment based on hazard, impact, and vulnerability characterization (see figure 3.1). Block II This chapter describes consolidation of the results of each of the block II sub-blocks into a “drought risk model” underpinned by both a case study and a comparison of Assess tools that can support drought risk assessment. drought risk Drought risk is the result of hazard, exposure, and vulnerability. Hazard is the occurrence of a drought event with possible ■ Assess current and recent drought hazards adverse effects. Exposure encompasses population and ■ Assess main trends of future drought hazards economic resources in an area where drought occurs. Vulnerability is defined as a system’s susceptibility to drought’s ■ Assess current and recent drought impacts adverse effects and lack of capacity to handle those effects (Limones et al. 2020; Nakicenovic et al. 2020). Generally, the ■ Assess country/region vulnerability to drought risk of drought causing damage and socioeconomic/ecological losses reflects the severity and the probability of occurrence, exposure, and vulnerability (Vogt et al. 2018). Source: Original figure for this publication. POSSIBLE RESULTS: By conducting a drought risk assessment, teams can identify areas and sectors that are not drought hazards. The result is a map highlighting the areas at only vulnerable to drought, but also likely to experience the higher risk. This qualitative ranking can be sufficient for a DRRA, phenomenon. They also can identify which type(s) of drought and it may be the only option in data-scarce environments. (meteorological, hydrological, agricultural, etc.) leads to Limones et al. (2020) based their ranking of drought risk in significant impacts for each sector or system considered. The Angola on prior impacts. However, a qualitative ranking does aim is to produce an assessment of the probability and severity not convey costing of the risks, for which a sensitivity analysis of drought occurrences and to evaluate potential consequences. or another type of (external) validation of the ranking is needed. Thus, the delivery of the drought risk assessment block consists of a numerical/visual representation of the risk, based on Data-driven semi-quantitative or quantitative assessments allow graphs and maps, a qualitative description, or both. Once teams for assignment of values in terms of risk indices or even levels select areas of intervention, they can prioritize potential drought of probability of losses. They build on the principle that drought risk reduction and drought resilience strengthening measures must be defined and assessed in relation to its impacts. Thus, (through block IV). they aim to explore the (statistical) links among key climate and hydrological variables, droughts, and consequential effects IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING DROUGHT RISK ASSESS- over time and space. Carrão, Naumann, and Barbosa (2016) MENTS AND A SNAPSHOT OF AVAILABLE TOOLS: and Antofie, Doherty, and Marin-Ferrer (2018) provide an Antofie, Doherty, and Marin-Ferrer (2018) distinguish between overview of tested approaches and risk index calculations. A two main risk assessment methods: qualitative or (semi-) good example of a fully data-driven drought risk quantitative quantitative. A qualitative risk assessment depicts risk as a assessment is the current effort by the European Commission’s descriptive class/score or a qualitative ranking of risk levels for European Drought Observatory for Resilience and Adaptation different areas. The latter can be performed simply by overlaying (EDORA) Project. The project’s drought impact database the areas that are vulnerable with those experiencing significant compiles and structures information on both drought levels and DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 19 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) impacts over the last 40 years across the European Union (EU). of detail achievable only if teams have sufficient longitudinal Box 3.1 presents Romania’s current drought risk baseline based data on impacts (that is, if linking the impact of events and their on the model built for the EDORA Project—a baseline at a level occurrence and severity is possible and statistically sound). BOX 3.1 Machine Learning-Based, Data-Driven Drought Risk Assessment for Romania Based on the model built for the European Commission’s EDORA Project, the World Bank conducted a deep- dive drought risk assessment for Romania with more granular data. The exercise built on a drought hazard characterization (see box 3.3) and on an impact collection and assessment (see box 3.7). These previous assessments compiled historical values for hazards and impacts for all of Romania’s river basin administrations (these are administrative boundaries). Cost estimates of these impacts were assigned where possible. A set of Standardized Drought Hazard Indices (SDHIs) is calculated on a monthly basis and comprises predictors for the model (that is, the triggers/biophysical drivers of the dependent impacts). The model correlates anomalies of inventory impact variables with anomalies of hydrometeorological hazard indices. For the drought risk assessment for Romania, SDHI thresholds were defined for each impact type and location. The attribution of drought impacts to different systems is enabled through the application of the so-called fast-and-frugal trees machine-learning technique (see figure B3.1.1). Fast-and-frugal trees are simple decision algorithms for solving binary classification tasks. On the basis of predictor variables, namely the SDHI, they predict the values of a binary criterion variable, for example, transportation losses 20 percent below the average or energy production losses of 5 percent. FIGURE B3.1.1 Example of a Binary Decision Tree for Recognizing Drought Impacts Condition 1 TRUE FALSE Action 1 Condition 2 TRUE FALSE Action 2 Condition 3 TRUE FALSE Action 3 Default Source: Adapted from de Mesentier Silva et al. 2016. Once the above-described operation is performed, teams can understand (1) the different configurations of a drought hazard that can lead to each impact, (2) the thresholds of the hazard indices that trigger an issue in the different sectors and areas, and (3) the likelihood that these issues will be experienced in each place due solely to drought (that is, distinguished from other potential causes). (box continues next page) 20 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) BOX 3.1 (continued) The accuracy scores used to create machine-learning models describe the models’ capacity to predict the occurrence or absence of an impact. The models are constructed with the goal of minimizing false alarms, that is, simulated reductions in production levels that were not actually observed. Consequently, the models are relatively conservative in that they highlight only the proportion of anomalies that are undoubtedly linked to drought. In many cases, the models may thus underestimate the role of drought, yielding relatively optimistic estimates of risk. For some sectors and systems, and in some zones, the accuracy and sensitivity of machine-learning models will be very high. In those cases, the connection between the hazard and the respective impact is distinctive, and drought undoubtedly drives the behavior of the anomalies. In other cases, the anomalies and drought may not have a strong correlation, so the expected losses caused by drought appear less significant compared with losses derived from other drivers. The created models allow teams to predict impacts depending on when and how often the selected drought hazard indices’ thresholds are surpassed. In the final step, predictions from the decision trees are composed and added up. The objective of the Romania exercise is to map the grouped likelihoods that areas will experience a certain decrease in the system’s performance due to drought. Probable maximum loss curves are being created for different types and levels of impacts in all the systems at risk (an example of development of probable maximum loss curves and drought risk maps is presented in figure B3.1.2). FIGURE B3.1.2 Drought Risk Maps and Probable Maximum Loss Curves Developed by the EDORA Project Warming Level +3.0oC Projected / Current Loss Reduction of more than 25% Increased by a factor of 1.5 to 2 Reduction between 10% and 25% Increased by a factor of 2 to 3 No important variation Increased by a factor of 3 to 4 Increased by a factor of 1.1 to 1.5 Increased by a factor of more than 4 Probable Maximum Loss (PML) curves o Wheat - Warming Level +1.5 C Wheat - Warming Level +2.0oC Wheat - Warming Level +3.0oC Loss (%) Loss (%) Loss (%) Return Period (years) Return Period (years) Return Period (years) Source: Rossi et al. 2023. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 21 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) TABLE 3.1 Strengths and Weaknesses of Three Types of Drought Risk Assessment Type of Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference assessment Qualitative risk Useful approach for data- Neither quantifies the risk nor Limones et assessment scarce environments. Rapid, defines what risk component (H, al. (2020) inexpensive. Can be utilized V, or E) is most relevant in each even without specialized case. Does not link vulnerability expertise or resources for components with types of more in-depth analyses. impacts. Set of indicators is not exhaustive and does not provide a complete definition of vulnerability. Ground-truthing is qualitative. Normally not capable of including future drought risk. Empirical semi- Provides a map of areas at Does not establish a linkage with Carrão, quantitative high drought risk in numerical actual impacts. Naumann, assessment terms and links risk to the and most important component Barbosa (H, V, or E) in each case. (2016) Data-driven Provides a map of areas at Requires machine-learning/ See quantitative high drought risk and a proxy modeling expertise. Depends application assessment or a magnitude of the potential on a comprehensive impact example in (for example, risk. Includes ground-truthing compilation and assessment with box 3.1. EDORA) because it incorporates longitudinal data. impacts in the assessment. Source: World Bank Group. Note: H = hazard; V = vulnerability; E = exposure. Table 3.1 presents three types of risk assessments. Teams are deficits to soil and hydrological stress issues) of drought in a encouraged to consult the Global Inventory of Drought Hazard given country or region—can help teams assess the likelihood of and Risk Modeling Tools and Resources (Deltares 2018) for a drought occurrence and identify trends and hotspots. Fully linked more comprehensive overview of approaches. to this characterization is monitoring, which consists of tracking the evolution of drought. In many cases, monitoring can serve as The subsequent sub-blocks are each dedicated to assessing a an early warning system, allowing authorities and communities to variable of the overall risk equation, thus forming the basis for detect drought in its initial stages and to act accordingly. the above-mentioned risk modeling. Monitoring and characterization of the hazard are preferably performed through the calculation and posterior analysis of 3.1 Assessing Current and Recent Standardized Drought Hazard Indices (SDHIs). These indices Drought Hazards are used to quantify and assess the severity, duration, and spatial extent of drought conditions on the basis of WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: meteorological, vegetation, and hydrological data, particularly Characterization of drought hazard—the severity, frequency, precipitation, evapotranspiration, temperature, soil moisture, duration, extent, and propagation patterns (from precipitation and vegetation health. 22 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) POSSIBLE RESULTS: Hazard characterization will help of any DRRA; it provides the context for improving drought risk teams identify the severity, frequencies, and durations of management. The results of this analysis frame all subsequent droughts over time and space. It is useful to understand how a steps of the DRRA and significantly inform the types and scopes current drought manifests in the context of average conditions of block II vulnerability, impact, and overall risk assessments. and how past drought events evolved. More broadly, hazard characterization can also help teams identify areas with higher Furthermore, indices and indicators selected for drought drought hazard trends and characteristics. characterization and monitoring can feed into the development and delivery of information and decision-making/decision- Analyses for evaluating and tracking drought hazards can support tools. Once a proactive drought preparedness plan consider precipitation, evapotranspiration, flows, vegetation is developed and in place, monitoring of defined drought- conditions, soil moisture, and other parameters. Drought is a characterization indices and indicators can be used to trigger complex and multifaceted phenomenon, so ideally teams use specific measures. several drought indices (SDHI mainly) and indicators to provide complementary information about the various dimensions IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING THIS BUILDING BLOCK of drought conditions. Some standardization of drought AND A SNAPSHOT OF AVAILABLE TOOLS: If the classification categories is encouraged for consistency in target country or region relies on a monitoring system (see communicating the extent of the drought within and between box 3.2) that offers SDHI or indices derived from them, teams these sectors (see box 3.2). could complete block II just by developing a narrative or an overview of drought patterns based on the monitoring HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING system’s information. BLOCKS: Drought hazard characterization is the foundation Jacques Gaimard / Pixabay DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 23 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.2 Drought Monitoring System in Brazil As an element of a drought preparedness plan, Brazil developed a drought monitoring system. Different stages of drought are defined on the basis of drought indicators and associated with possible impacts (see figure B3.2.1). To build the map, numerous institutions monitor rainfall (the amount of precipitation in each location), reservoir levels, soil moisture, and other critical information in each of the country’s states. These indicators are measured and combined monthly and visualized with a map. Depending on the stage or intensity of a drought, predefined measures or types of actions are triggered. As important as the map is the organizational arrangement of people, institutions, and processes that contribute the information depicted on it (De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017). FIGURE B3.2.1 Stages of Drought and Their Potential Impacts in Brazil a. Drought stages b. Drought monitoring map Category Percentile Description Possible Impacts Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting and Abnormally growth of crops or pastures. D0 30 dry Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered Some damage to crops, pastures; streams, reservoirs, or wells low; Moderate D1 20 some water shortages developing drought or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions requested Crop or pasture losses likely; Severe D2 10 water shortages common; water drought restrictions imposed Major crop/pasture losses; Extreme D3 5 widespread water shortages or LEGEND drought restrictions Intensities: Types of impacts: No drought C = Short term Mild drought (i.e., agriculture, pasturelands) Exceptional and widespread crop/ Moderate Drought L = Long term Exceptional pasture losses; shortages of water Severe Drought (i.e., hydrology, environment) D4 2 Extreme Drought drought in reservoirs, streams, and wells Exceptional Drought \/\ Delimitation of predominant impacts creating water emergencies Sources: Adapted from De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017; Adapted from Monitor de Secas 2024. 24 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) Khasar Sandag / World Bank In the absence of a drought monitoring system, teams can turn Index (SPEI) global drought monitor and the related SPEI to several global and regional drought portals that provide global dataset, which offer near real-time information about temporal maps of drought indices that could support a rough drought conditions at the global scale, with a 1-degree spatiotemporal characterization of the hazard. If the scope of spatial resolution and a monthly time resolution.2 SPEI time the assessment is focused on a particular recent or ongoing scales between 1 and 48 months are provided and can be event, this approach could suffice, but it should acknowledge downloaded in a user-friendly way as a time series for a point the limitations of not using granular or ground-based data. or a bounding box. A collection of most of these geo-visualization tools for For the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI), which the monitoring and early warning of drought events was solely describes precipitation deficits, similar series can be developed and is updated by the UNCCD, and the Integrated downloaded from several portals, such as “ClimatView—A Tool Drought Management Programme’s (IDMP) “Drought and Early for Viewing Monthly Climate Data” or the International Research 1 Warning” portal also keeps track of these tools. Additionally, Institute’s “Global Drought Analysis Tool.”3 Agricultural drought the Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery indices can be downloaded from the Food and Agriculture (GFDRR) and Deltares have developed a global inventory, Organization’s “Agricultural Stress Index System.”4 at the global and regional level, of drought hazard and risk modeling tools, resources, and drought datasets and platforms Drought hazard characterization, in this case, may consist (Deltares 2017) as well as a catalogue of drought hazard and simply of plotting the time series and comparing patterns risk tools (Deltares 2018). These resources provide links to among indices (see box 3.3), but the time series can be further mapping portals and describe what to use them for and how analyzed depending on the resources available for and the to apply them. scope of the assessment. To guide such a characterization, Vogt et al. (2018) developed a comprehensive list of A more in-depth but still relatively rapid option that relies parameters to calculate, including frequency of droughts, on medium-resolution open-source global datasets is to severities, intensities, durations, onsets, end points, peaks, download and use preprocessed indices provided in web and areas affected. portals like the Standardized Precipitation-Evapotranspiration DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 25 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.3 Hydrometeorological Drought Hazard Characterization in Romania In this case study, Standardized Drought Hazard Indices (SDHIs) were used to depict the severity and spatial extent of drought in the historic context in Romania. Two broadly recognized and complementary SDHI were applied at the level of river basin districts, the Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI), and the Standardized Precipitation-Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI). The key difference between SPI and SPEI is that SPEI accounts for both precipitation and evapotranspiration; SPI considers only the former. Once the SDHI were calculated, some statistics were extracted and mapped to perform an interpretation of the spatiotemporal evolution of the drought during the last decade of study (see figures B3.3.1 and B3.3.2). FIGURE B3.3.1 Minimum Value of the SPI 12 and SPI 48 Drought Indices Every Year from 2012 to 2022 in Romania’s River Basin Administrations (Administrative Boundaries) Minimum index value in the year 2-3 1-2 0-1 0 -1-0 -2 - -2 -3 - -2 Source: World Bank 2024. FIGURE B3.3.2 Minimum Value of the SPEI 12 and SPEI 48 Drought Indices Every Year from 2012 to 2022 in Romania’s River Basin Administrations (Administrative Boundaries) Minimum index value in the year 2-3 1-2 0-1 0 -1-0 -2 - -2 -3 - -2 Source: World Bank 2024. Additionally, SPEI and SPI results were complemented with other parameters to obtain a more holistic drought hazard characterization. Such additional parameters included, for example, the evolution of the total actual runoff in Romania to represent national-level water statistics, flows, Water Exploitation Index (WEI), and WEI+ indices in the river basin administrations. 26 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) Importantly, monitoring different aspects of drought along the extensive collection of hydrometeorological data—including full hydrologic cycle may require a collection of indicators and in situ or estimated longitudinal data on moisture, flows, and indices beyond those recommended above for their broad groundwater parameters—in coordination with local agencies application and ease of use. The selection of drought indicators/ and data processing by a local expert. Thus, this approach indices depends on available resources and the scope of the is recommended only if the required information is readily exercise. It should be determined by the distinctive traits of available and shared and would provide far more accurate droughts that are closely linked to the country stakeholders’ results than off-the-shelf tools to analyze drought hazard (see primary areas of concern. To support selection, the Handbook of box 3.4). Table 3.2 compares methodologies for characterizing Drought Indicators and Indices (WMO and GWP 2016) describes drought hazard, some of which can be utilized even without the purpose of the most used indicators and indices as well specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. as the level of difficulty of their application and interpretation. Importantly, a summary table compares all the analyzed tools. DATA NEEDS: Meteorological, hydrological, hydro- Steinemann, Iacobellis, and Cayan (2015) provide a useful geological, biophysical, agricultural data (time series/statistical framework for the application of indices and indicators. datasets, remote sensing datasets, surveys, and so on), or a combination thereof are needed to characterize drought hazard. Constructing indices and indicators on the basis of ground information received from local agencies or with high UNDP (2020) presents a non-exhaustive list of open datasets accuracy/resolution open-source datasets is another possible that provide information on precipitation and soil moisture. approach. The same array of indices mentioned above can be Google Earth Engine (GEE) provides satellite-based and model- built with user-friendly calculators, such as the SPI Generator based climatic, hydrological, and hydrogeological estimates. by the National Drought Mitigation Center (2018) or the SPEI Calculator by the Spanish Higher Council for Scientific The World Bank (2019) provides extensive practical guidance Research.5 Constructing indices and indicators requires on how to set up drought hazard assessments. Watershed and Development Initiative / USAID DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 27 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.4 Preparing a Drought Hazard Overview for Southern Angola with Indices Calculation and Ground Data The Drought Exceedance Probability Index was selected to analyze recent drought hazard in Angola because precipitation time series were available for parts of the region. These series were used to calibrate the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis, or Tropical Multi-satellite Precipitation Analysis (TMPA) product (see figure B3.4.1). The Drought Exceedance Probability Index does not work with pre-established timescales, which makes it very useful in defining actual precipitation drought onsets and durations and in identifying deficit peaks. FIGURE B3.4.1 Drought Evolution in Provinces of Angola, Based on Corrected TMPA Series Source: Serrat-Capdevila, Limones et al. 2022. However, it was necessary to go beyond the rainfall phenomenon. To understand the evolution of water availability during the identified drought period, the monthly precipitation minus the actual evapotranspiration (P-Eta) was computed at a medium spatial resolution (0.25°, ~25 kilometers) across the entire region as a hydrological drought indicator. On-the-ground evapotranspiration data were not available, so in this case the indicator was based entirely on satellite estimates from the Global Land Evaporation Amsterdam Model. 28 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) TABLE 3.2 Methodologies for Characterizing Current/Recent Drought Hazards Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Preparation of an Fast. Accuracy and Example of drought monitors: overview based on Can be performed comprehensiveness of • Brazil : Monitor de Secas information from without expert the overview depends on • Spain: AEMET an established input. the characteristics of the monitoring system in already-existing monitor. • USA: Drought Monitor The country is the country/region* • Mexico: Monitor de Sequia already aware of the hazard levels, • Europe: Drought Observatory this block is well covered before the DRRA exercise. Preparation of an Fast. The description of the Examples of portals for resources overview based on Can be performed hazard will include no and tools: global and regional without expert data analysis, only maps • UNCCD Inventory of Portals, drought portals that input. and graphs obtained from Resources and Tools provide temporal the portals. • IDMP Inventory of Portals, maps of drought Resolution or accuracy Resources and Tools indices* issues. • GFDRR and Deltares Inventory of Portals, Resources and Tools (Deltares 2017) • Global Integrated Drought Monitoring and Prediction System (GIDMaPS) Hazard Data-driven Resolution or accuracy Examples of preprocessed characterization assessment. issues. drought indices: based on downloaded Flexible. Some of the globally • For downloading series: preprocessed indices available SPEI series ClimatView served in web are built with simplified • For downloading series: IRI portals* evapotranspiration Global Drought Analysis Tool estimates. • For downloading series: SPEI Requires some low- to Global Drought Monitor medium-difficulty data • Pan-African high-resolution • analysis. drought index dataset • FAO’s Agricultural Stress Index System See application example in box 3.3. Hazard Data-driven Requires local data Tools for selecting indices and characterization assessment. availability and local guidelines for their application: based on construction Flexible. agency cooperation. • Handbook of Drought Indicators of indices and Accuracy issues if data and Indices (WMO and GWP 2016) Maximum accuracy indicators with quality is not validated. potential. • Steinemann, Iacobellis, and ground information Long processing time. Cayan (2015) received from local agencies or with Requires a drought • Tsakiris et al. (2007) relatively high- expert to build the accuracy/resolution indices, conduct the See application example in box 3.4. open-source datasets analysis, and facilitate the interpretation. Source: World Bank Group. * These instruments can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 29 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) 3.2 Assessing Main Trends of map allow users to develop maps and charts on projections of temperature and precipitation.7 The Aqueduct Water Risk Future Drought Hazards Atlas maps and analyzes future water risks across locations.8 The Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut (KNMI) WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: Climate Change Atlas allows for country-specific data series Drought assessment and management needs to be visualization of a broad array of meteorological variables and conceptualized in the context of climate change. Although the hydrological features like net water flux.9 Very useful rapid local variability and magnitude of changes in drought patterns overviews can be produced easily with the World Bank Group’s are difficult to determine using projections and scenarios, Climate Change Knowledge Portal, which offers projected drought risks will increase for several regions and sectors climatology of the Annual SPEI Drought Index for all countries unless climate change adaptation measures are adopted. (see box 3.5).10 Hence, it is crucial to consider climate scenarios and what they could mean for droughts in a given region (Vogt et al. 2018). Caution is needed when working with climate projections; uncertainty must be carefully presented. Importantly, some POSSIBLE RESULTS: This step will offer an overview of impacts of droughts—on selected crops, for example—will the potential future development of drought hazards and water depend on the temporal distribution of hydrometeorological scarcity in specified regions. variables and their anomalies as much as on total accumulated values, which are more commonly provided HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING through climate change scenarios. Hydrologic modeling in BLOCKS: Some or all of the variables that were chosen the global climate models is rudimentary. Model outputs to characterize past droughts will be subject to drought are often used in additional hydrologic analytics and are projections. The results will directly impact the following sometimes hydrodynamic analytics to obtain additional steps, for example, by forming a baseline for the drought insights related to surface and water resources (including preparedness gap analysis and a baseline against which additional scenarios of water infrastructure and use). possible investments are assessed. If historical droughts However, these model outputs are often subject to data and proven to cause significant impacts in the target area are modeling constraints associated with complex systems and projected to increase or intensify, this block suggests how the future climate scenario uncertainty. overall risk might also evolve. Drought hazard overviews can be complemented by SDHI IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING THIS BUILDING BLOCK and trends computed on the basis of CMIP6 for all locations AND A SNAPSHOT OF AVAILABLE TOOLS: Existing around the globe. Zeng et al. (2022) and Vicente-Serrano et data and analytics can be leveraged to provide a history of al. (2022) present assessments of global meteorological, droughts. They can also be used with other climate change hydrological, and agricultural drought under future warming. scenarios and hydrologic models to gain insight into future Christian et al. (2023) provides a similar assessment focused drought hazards, although uncertainty needs to be carefully on flash droughts. The NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset by the NASA considered. A quick overview can be prepared on the basis Climate Analytics Group, available in GEE, can produce a of information from portals offering regional and country more detailed description. This dataset is made up of global projections and information from interactive maps and graphs. downscaled climate scenarios for variables like near-surface The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) offers air temperature or precipitation. It is computed across several Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). An analysis based information and computation of different regional scenarios on this dataset can be performed in approximately one day or of the SPI index in the IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas.6 The less of work by a specialist. Examples of applications appear in National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s climate Ghazi, Dutt, and Haghighi (2023) and Xu et al. (2023). change web portal and the Climate Data Factory’s interactive 30 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) BOX 3.5 Hydrometeorological Projections for Romania Assessment of Romania’s drought risk included a description of the graphs available at the country scale in the World Bank Climate Change Knowledge Portal. It involved an estimation of the evolution of the Standardized Precipitation-Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) indices for different Shared Socioeconomic Pathways based on Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6) data. The historic analyses performed in other blocks of the Romania study revealed that SPEI indices show drought intensification in the last decade for most of the country and that the phenomenon is connected to increasing multi-sectoral impacts on the ground. The simple forward-looking exercise of plotting future SPEI scenarios from the Climate Change Knowledge Portal created a powerful narrative because it revealed that hydrometeorological drought could intensify throughout the century. FIGURE B3.5.1 Projected Annual SPEI Drought Index in Romania (Reference Period 1995–2014), Multi-Model Ensemble Source: Based on World Bank Group using data from the CMIP6, World Climate Research Program. An in-depth analysis can be performed using simulations from (WCRP) CMIP6 Search Interface, the WCRP’s Cordex Search available models from the CMIP experiments and from the Interface, or the Climate Data Store.11 The model intercomparison Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) projects also provide simulations from global water models and applying SDHI (see box 3.6). These projections can be and global hydrological models, which can aid in developing downloaded (expertise required) from several repositories and projections for different SDHI. portals, for example, the World Climate Research Programme’s DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 31 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.6 Hydrometeorological Drought Future Scenario Development for the Angola Climate Change and Development Report As part of the Angola Climate Change and Development Report, researchers used outputs of the Coordinated Regional Downscaling Experiment (CORDEX) and the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 and Phase 6 (CMIP5 and CMIP6), as depicted in figure B3.6.1 and figure B3.6.2, to study projected changes in the frequency of droughts (in 10-year intervals) with a 12-month Standard Precipitation Index (SPI-12) or Standard Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI-12) less than -1.0 (a condition of moderate drought). Overall, droughts characterized by rainfall (SPI) show no uniformly strong change in the future, as the trends in the different modelling approaches differ. However, projections of individual models indicate possible increases in the frequency of drought years. The SPEI shows a more significant change in the future for some of Angola’s basins. The CORDEX projections point to a more significant increase in drought, particularly in southern Angola (World Bank Group 2022). FIGURE B3.6.1 Frequency of Drought Years with SPI-12 Values Less Than -1 (per Decade) in Historical Simulations and Projections Under the RCP85/SSP585 Scenario Source: World Bank Group 2022. (box continues next page) 32 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) BOX 3.6 (continued) FIGURE B3.6.2 Frequency of Drought Years with SPEI-12 Values Less Than -1 (per Decade) in Historical Simulations and Projections Under the RCP85/SSP585 Scenario Source: World Bank Group 2022. These data can further be explored through additional models Another advanced option involves basin-level hydrological (including hydrologic models) to get additional insights simulations under future climate change conditions, with the recognizing the inherent uncertainty. The World Bank is piloting previously mentioned climate scenarios as model inputs. a hydro-climatic stress test tool to perform drought-related Setting up a model from scratch exceeds the typical scope of sensitivity analyses using climate scenarios. This approach a DRRA. Therefore, a prerequisite for adopting this approach aligns with the Decision Making Under Deep Uncertainty is having an existing, well-validated, and calibrated model that (DMDU) approach and is recommended for block II of the accurately represents local hydrological dynamics. If feasible, DRRA. Working with sensitivity analyses, scenarios, or both this method can provide relatively precise and context-specific requires several weeks or months of consultancy work by an predictions, enhancing teams’ understanding of future runoff expert proficient in handling climate projections data, analysis, conditions for a range of scenarios. and interpretation. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 33 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) World Bank CCDRs aimed at proposing measures for diversified services (ecological drought) is also crucial. IDMP developed and climate-resilient development often include analysis of a comprehensive list of potential drought impacts, which climate change scenarios to highlight the potential impacts is presented in an annex of National Drought Management of climate change on drought occurrence and severity (see Policy Guidelines: A Template for Action (Wilhite, WMO, GWP, box 3.6). Block II can pull from the outputs of a CCDR for the and National Drought Mitigation Center 2014). Unless the target country or region. Table 3.3 presents methodologies for DRRA has a clear sectoral focus, an impact assessment should characterizing trends in future drought hazards. address all the categories of impacts that are relevant in the given country or region. DATA NEEDS: Future drought hazard characterization requires considering general circulation models, such as Moreover, the economic consequences of drought extend from CORDEX and CMIP outputs, as well as CCDRs developed by macroeconomic levels to individual households. Currently, the World Bank. Prior hydrological models built for the target there is a need to expand evaluations to include impacts on area can support a more advanced assessment. other systems beyond agriculture to improve drought risk characterization (Venton et al. 2019; Akyapi, Bellon, and Massetti 2022). By characterizing the impacts of past or ongoing drought 3.3 Assessing Current and events, decision-makers can estimate potential economic losses Recent Drought Impacts and social disruptions, aiding in the development of appropriate policies and preparedness measures. WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: Disaster impacts can include economic, human, and POSSIBLE RESULTS: A range of impacts—ideally, environmental impacts. Given the general slow onset of those that are direct/indirect, structural/nonstructural, and droughts, impacts gradually evolve; they are geographically monetarily/non-monetarily quantifiable—are assessed for all and temporarily dispersed and both direct and indirect. Thus, relevant sectors and levels of drought severity. drought impacts are often less visible and more difficult to assess or attribute to drought. Modeling indirect and less evident impacts and risks linked to drought across sectors is challenging due to the dynamic Drought impact assessments often prioritize agriculture and diverse variables involved. The complexity arises from the due to its immediate and more easily measurable economic temporal lag between drought events and observable effects, losses. However, drought can affect multiple sectors, including coupled with the intricate interactions among various factors the environment, forestry, biodiversity, water supply, power within each sector or system. The feasibility of constructing generation, and tourism sectors (see figure 3.2). accurate models is constrained by this inherent complexity, so only an extensive compilation of information related to the Capturing less immediate and visible aspects of drought impacts, different variables involved would allow teams to expand the particularly in areas such as public health and ecosystems, is characterization to impacts on systems not so obvious, such recommended. Droughts can significantly affect public health as the manufacturing sector and ecosystem services. by increasing dust and can heighten risk of diseases due to water reductions or pollution. The stress and anxiety associated HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING with water shortages and failing crops can contribute to BLOCKS: Knowledge of drought impacts reveals drought mental health issues, particularly in rural communities that rely risk hotspots and vulnerabilities that inform prioritization heavily on agriculture for their livelihoods. Droughts can have of efforts and resource allocation. Previous building blocks a tremendous effect on impoverished communities and local are also linked to drought impact definition: drought hazard economies in many other ways. characterization is essential to mark pre- and post-disaster baselines, or drought versus normal conditions baselines. Addressing drought impacts on biodiversity and ecosystem Success in implementing block II can be particularly subject 34 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) TABLE 3.3 Methodologies for Characterizing Main Trends in Future Drought Hazards Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Quick overview Immediate. The description of the Interactive maps: based on No expertise required. hazard will consist • World Bank Climate Change interactive maps mainly of visual Knowledge Portal and graphs of material obtained regional and from portals and will • World Bank Geospatial Platform country climatic include no extensive • World Bank HydroInformatics projections* data analysis. Catalog Resolution or • FAO Earthmap accuracy issues. • WGI Interactive Atlas • NOAA Climate Change Web Portal • Climate Data Factory Interactive Map • WRI Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas • KNMI Climate Change Atlas Publications: • Zeng et al. (2022) • Vicente-Serrano et al. (2022) • Christian et al. (2023) See application example in box 3.7. Detailed Fast. Limited variables Application examples: overview using Data-driven included. • Ghazi, Dutt, and Haghighi (2023) the NEX-GDDP- assessment. It requires some CMIP6 dataset • Xu et al. (2023) Flexible. expertise (less for (e.g., in Google World Bank Climate • World Bank Climate Change Earth Engine) Based on downscaled Change Knowledge Knowledge Portal or World Bank information, which Portal data). • NASA Earth Exchange Global Climate Change should be interpreted Daily Downscaled Projections Knowledge Portal with caution due Challenges in accurately NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 CMIP6 data to uncertainties associated with such reproducing fine-scale information. details and nuances and complex spatial interactions. In-depth analysis Data-driven Requires an expert. Application examples: applying SDHI assessment. Challenges • See Angola CCDR in box 3.6 to simulated Most flexible (models, in accurately scenarios (CMIP, • See other CCDRs variables, scales) reproducing fine-scale CORDEX, etc.) assessment. details and nuances or sensitivity and complex spatial Simulations from available models: analysis applied Based on downscaled information, which interactions. • WCRP CMIP6 Search Interface to SDHI should be interpreted • WCRP CORDEX Search Interface with caution due • Copernicus Climate Data Store to uncertainties associated with such information. (table continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 35 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) TABLE 3.3 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Hydrological Same as above. Same as above. Application examples: simulation Can take into account Feasible for a DRRA • Wu et al. (2022) under future local hydrological only if the target area climate change • Tenagashaw (2022) dynamics better and has validated and conditions and potentially yield the calibrated models. • Khoi et al. (2021) application of most accurate results. SDHI to the simulated variables Source: World Bank Group. * This methodology can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. FIGURE 3.2 Overview of Sectors Impacted by Drought Drought Agricultural sector Non-agricultural sector Soil moisture deficit Water supplies in form of stream flow, reservoir, wetlands, groundwater, etc. Crop and pasture losses Other industries/ business losses Irrigation Horticulture Tourism and and landscaping Crop and pasture losses recreation services losses Public utilities Secondary economic impacts Direct economic impacts Direct economic impacts Overall economic impacts of drought Source: Adapted from Ding, Hayes, and Widham 2011. 36 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) to the readiness of the country and the demand for a DRRA relevant World Bank reference that can support identification because significant local engagement and effort are required of drought impacts is Droughts and Deficits: The Impact of to collect data on drought impacts. Water Scarcity on Economic Growth (Zaveri, Damania, and Engle 2023). IDEAS FOR DEVELOPING THIS BUILDING BLOCK AND A SNAPSHOT OF AVAILABLE TOOLS: Important Some approaches aim to value impacts. Various initiatives insights about how to perform the analyses for this sub-block tackle database compilation and monitoring of drought appear in King-Okumu (2019) and Ding, Hayes, and Widhalm (2011). impacts, including the U.S. Drought Impact Reporter, the Caribbean Climate Impacts Database, and the JRC European To understand impacts, experts often start with impact chain Drought Observatory, and, at the global level, DesInventar and identification. In a study of drought impact chains, normally EM-DAT.12 A forthcoming publication of the National Drought based on conceptual maps and narratives, they analyze the Mitigation Center (housed at the University of Nebraska– cause-and-effect relationships of drought on various aspects Lincoln) reviews these databases. In general, the databases of society and the environment. Conceptual maps visually include minimal information for developing countries due to represent the complex linkages and interactions between data collection challenges. It is important to check whether the drought-related factors and their consequences. Narratives target area has relevant registers in these databases. provide detailed descriptions of how these factors unfold and affect different sectors, communities, and ecosystems. The analytical framework of a Post-Disaster Needs Assessment (PDNA) attempts to study disaster impacts but often focuses By combining conceptual maps and narratives, practitioners on immediate effects, leading to underestimation. Moreover, gain a deeper understanding of the interconnections and comprehensive valuations are challenging due to reliance on the cascading effects of drought. This approach is based local feedback, which may not systematically track damages on interviews, surveys, and workshops with stakeholders and losses. PDNAs rely on Damage and Loss Assessment to identify how changes can lead to effects across multiple (DALA). The Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery areas and to understand the context-specific complexity developed a detailed guide for DALAs (GFDRR 2010a, b, c). of a drought’s impacts. If made available for the study area, They define pre- and post-disaster baselines or situations and social accounting matrices can reveal how different sectors estimate damage and losses on, typically, each of the most of the economy are interconnected and how shocks in one directly and immediately affected sectors. sector propagate throughout the entire economy. A qualitative recognition of the impact chains is a helpful starting point for PDNAs often estimate macro-economic impacts. They collect this sub-block; in many areas, the lack of data will prevent a data, typically from government agencies and national statistics more in-depth analysis and quantification. offices, on economic indicators such as gross domestic product, industrial production, trade, investment, and government The World Bank’s Water for Shared Prosperity (Zhang and revenues and expenditures. They then compare baseline Borja-Vega 2024) could provide valuable insights and scenarios with the drought event. Guidance for establishing references to understand how droughts might affect the connections is available in Freire-González, Decker, and Hall target area over time, particularly in relation to the four (2017) and Zaveri, Damania, and Engle (2023), among others. pillars of prosperity: human capital (health and education), Assessment of macro-economic impacts is recommended to financial capital ( jobs and income), social capital (peace and complement other analyses in this sub-block. social cohesion), and natural capital (environment). Another DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 37 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) A tool related to a PDNA but focused on communities is assumptions about several parameters, for which stakeholders the Human Recovery Needs Assessment (HRNA) or Human and expert judgment can be helpful. The references to PDNA Impact Assessment, which focuses on social, economic, and and DALA assessments in table 3.4 offer guidance on how to environmental impacts on affected populations. It involves minimize these potential problems. a systematic and structured process of interviews, surveys (to identify vulnerable groups and areas), and data gathering When displacement is a consequence of drought, measuring to prioritize recovery interventions and effectively allocate its extent can avoid any implicit place-based bias in socio- resources. HRNAs also can support long-term preparedness economic estimates. For instance, baseline impact numbers actions. often rely on pre-disaster statistics, which fail to account for displacement as well as the likelihood of return. The needs Like DALAs, HRNAs require government endorsement and of a population in a given area are influenced by migration the participation of affected communities. The EU, UNDP, because a decline in population can reduce the needs at the and the World Bank developed guidelines to perform HRNAs disaster location. In any case, it is beneficial to support impact (EU, UNDP, and WBG 2019). Alternatively, a version of the assessments with a “following the people” approach, rather assessment, Social Impact Assessment, can be carried out. than relying solely on a place-based analysis. The World Bank and GFDRR prepared a manual for analyzing the social impacts of disasters (World Bank and GFDRR 2015). Even if reported damages and losses are the preferred A DALA/PDNA-like impact collection exercise may be the only indicators of actual drought impacts, remote sensing is option in data-scarce environments. becoming increasingly valuable as a proxy for tracking those impacts in data-scarce environments because it offers large PDNAs and the connected assessments mentioned above, spatial coverage and frequent measurements. Use of remote along with drought impact databases, often focus solely on sensing enhances the efficiency of data collection and provides recording the impacts of a specific/current drought event. a sustainable and scalable solution. Assessments should The advantage of event-driven data collection and analysis incorporate an evaluation of impacts in those sectors/systems is that it directly attributes impacts to droughts, based on that can be tracked with earth observation, such as agriculture local and expert knowledge. However, by definition, it does and, importantly, the environment. Remote sensing can allow not include previous droughts. To quantify drought impacts teams to count on indicators of dust accumulation, wildfires more extensively, continuous quantitative longitudinal data linked to drought, wetland degradation, forest damages, and collection, from country official statistics or agency reports, is so on. Box 3.7 mentions how remote sensing analyses were crucial. This effort establishes baseline conditions and allows used to assess drought impacts in Romania. comparison of conditions during droughts and during non- drought periods, indicating the relative severity of drought Analysis of drought impact data may involve descriptive impacts historically. Some quantitative longitudinal datasets statistics in drought and normality scenarios, trend analysis, may exist for purposes other than drought but show a “drought correlation analysis, or more sophisticated approaches, such as signal” (see box 3.7). regression or machine learning algorithms. Table 3.4 presents methodologies for drought impact assessment. Importantly, using such a bottom-up approach often poses aggregation and double-counting issues driven by DATA NEEDS: Statistical data, censuses, stakeholder/ socioeconomic and environmental interlinkages. A potential household surveys, interviews, and remote sensing data are remedy could be to adopt a model-based approach, at the needed for drought impact assessments. King-Okumu (2019) expense of additional simplification and the need to make reviews the data sources for such assessments. 38 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) Flore de Preneuf / World Bank BOX 3.7 Drought Impact Assessment for Romania For the characterization of drought impacts in Romania, spatial-temporal data series at different scales and timeframes were assessed for the following sectors and systems: (1) agriculture, livestock, and fisheries, (2) energy production, (3) inland fluvial transportation, (4) industrial productivity, (5) natural ecosystems, and (6) water supply. The National Database Romanian Tempo Online statistics and EUROSTAT statistics for Romania facilitated the data compilation task. Romanian authorities provided some of the time series data, particularly 2022 data. The data on sectors and systems encompasses different temporal intervals, occasionally focused on the most recent drought (2022), while in other instances extending further back in time. In some cases, the analyses relied only on historical data that, regrettably, does not include 2022 data. The research team compared these variables to the Standardized Precipitation-Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) and Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) results obtained in previous steps and described in boxes 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5. The specific methodology used to link hazard and impact often is based on the correlation of the SPEI (or SPI) series in a specific river basin administration (calculated for the previous section) with the variables relative to each impact. To measure how much the impact variables change in drought periods, the study team applied statistical techniques and graphical representations to compare two samples, the first taken in periods of normality and the second, during a drought. For example, for national hydropower production, the team found a correlation close to R 0.7 with an average SPEI6. Researchers were able to attribute and measure the mean reductions expected under different drought thresholds (see figure B3.7.1). (box continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 39 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.7 (continued) FIGURE B3.7.1 Hydropower Generation in Romania, 2000–2022 a. Monthly SPEI 6 drought index series and standardized total hydropower production 3.00000 3.00 2.25000 2.25 1.50000 1.50 0.75000 0.75 0.00000 0 -0.75000 -0.75 -1.50000 -1.50 -2.25000 -2.25 -3.00000 -3.00 Jan-00 Jun-00 Nov-00 Apr-01 Sep-01 Feb-02 Jul-02 Dec-02 May-03 Oct-03 Mar-04 Aug-04 Jan-05 Jun-05 Nov-05 Apr-06 Sep-06 Feb-07 Jul-07 Dec-07 May-08 Oct-08 Mar-09 Aug-09 Jan-10 Jun-10 Nov-10 Apr-11 Sep-11 Feb-12 Jul-12 Dec-12 May-13 Oct-13 Mar-14 Aug-14 Jan-15 Jun-15 Nov-15 Apr-16 Sep-16 Feb-17 Jul-17 Dec-17 May-18 Oct-18 Mar-19 Aug-19 Jan-20 Jun-20 Nov-20 Apr-21 Sep-21 Feb-22 Jul-22 Dec-22 Drought index series Hydropower production b. Total hydropower production at different drought levels 2,000,000 1,800,000 SPEI 6 < -0.5 1,600,000 SPEI 6 < -1 SPEI 6 < -1.5 Megawatt hours 1,400,000 1,200,000 x x 1,000,000 x Drought levels 800,000 600,000 Average monthly production of the entire series 400,000 Source: Adapted from World Bank 2024. As a complement to the ground data analyses, the team prepared a remote sensing-based overview of the changes in vegetation health, dry matter production, and yields of some key crops with data from Copernicus to assess the losses experienced during the most severe droughts.a The team validated the losses using local statistics. The heterogeneity of the gathered datasets conditioned the level of detail of the assessment performed for each sector/system, but using a variety of approaches allowed researchers to provide a holistic overview of impacts attributable to drought. a Copernicus Global Land Service, “Vegetation,” https://land.copernicus.eu/global/products/dmp. 40 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) Romwell “Ouie” Sanchez / USAID TABLE 3.4 Methodologies for Drought Impact Assessment Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Preparation of Compatible with all Event-based assessment. Established databases: an overview the methods. Heavily reliant on pre- • DesInventar based on the Rapid, easy, existing database on a information from • EM-DAT inexpensive. drought in the country/ an established region/impact monitoring • Caribbean Climate Impacts impact database/ system. Database monitoring • EU JRC European Drought system in the Observatory country/region* • Famine Early Warning Systems Network Remote sensing Compatible with and Connection to the ground References: analysis, with complementary to all non-existent because the • Global RApid post-disaster Damage earth observation the methods. Allows approach is desk-based. Estimation (GRADE) approach variables used as for expansion to Social effects of drought Gunasekera et al. (2018) proxy of impacts* some environmental cannot be directly impacts. • Copernicus captured. Rapid, inexpensive. • GEE for easy-to-access data Unlikely to consider on water presence, vegetation the needs of the most health and productivity, dust, vulnerable. fires, groundwater dynamics, etc. Heavily reliant on pre- existing data accessible outside the target country. See application example in box 3.7. (table continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 41 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) TABLE 3.4 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference HRNA or Compatible with the other Requires local interaction Reference: Human Impact approaches. and feedback (time- EU, UNDP, and WBG (2019) Assessment People-centered: consuming). assesses impacts on the Sample might not be fully ground and needs of the representative. most vulnerable. Impact chains Compatible with all the Qualitative. Application examples and identification other approaches. Requires local interaction references: Can be developed and feedback (time- • Lückerath, Rome, and Milde (2023) with different levels of consuming). • EDORA Project impact chains complexity/detail. definition Identifies main issues • Zhang and Borja-Vega (2024) linked to drought based on input from local stakeholders. Estimation of Compatible with all the Connection to the ground is References: the drought other approaches. minimal. • Freire-González, Decker and Hall macro- Rapid, easy, inexpensive, Rapid and desk-based. (2017) economic unless a more advanced Lacks inclusion of the needs • Zaveri, Damania, and Engle (2023) impact option that looks into the of the most vulnerable. • Damania et al. (2017) future impacts is also Heavily reliant on pre- • Global Change Assessment Model used. existing data. (GCAM), an integrated assessment Captures effects through tool for exploring sectoral supply chains. consequences and responses to global change. Can be narrowed Some tools allow for ex- down to drought effects. Can ante modeling of impacts. provide a sense of future impacts. Datasets: • World Bank Open Data • OECD Stats • OCHA humanitarian data by development partners worldwide PDNA/DALA Economic case is Event-based assessment, so References: (or adaptations) presented. it misses indirect and lagged • DALA methodology parts 1–3 effects. Methods are GFDRR (2010a, b, c) comprehensive: cross- Time constraints may • PDNA methodology sectoral, long-term view. compromise application. • EC, GFDRR, and UNDG (2013) Intended to be multi- Connection to the local level scale and include and affected communities is acknowledged to be weak, fieldwork. especially where timeframes Relatively fast if pre- are constrained. existing statistics exist. Heavily reliant on pre-existing data accessible in the target country. Expansion/ Same strengths as Same weaknesses as PDNA/ Reference: adaptation of the PDNA/DALA but also DALA, although not event- OCHA humanitarian data by PDNA/DALA- incorporates risk based. development partners worldwide like approach evolution. Not possible in data-scarce with longitudinal See application example in box 3.7. environments. quantitative data Likely to take more time. Source: World Bank Group. * This methodology can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. 42 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) 3.4 Assessing Country/Region while minimizing the likelihood of plan failure, as well as foster political ownership (De Nys, Engle, and Magalhães 2017). Vulnerability to Drought King-Okumu (2019) categorizes vulnerability approaches as WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: (1) people-centered, (2) land-based mapping and models of A high level of vulnerability to drought threatens livelihoods ecosystem service production, and (3) hydrometeorological and fulfillment of the most basic needs. Although one hazard assessments including water balance accounting. Some can affect multiple communities simultaneously, the impacts approaches focus on a single criterion, whereas others use manifest to varying degrees in those communities, depending multi-criteria. on their level of vulnerability or resilience. Vulnerability is generally understood as a function of sensitivity and Most vulnerability assessments are based on indication (that coping (or adaptive) capacity (Serrat-Capdevila et al. 2022; is, they rely on producing indicators of vulnerability), but they Nakicenovic et al. 2000). Because droughts often involve do not explicitly provide a value for the potential losses that complex interactions among many hydrometeorological, they identify and, therefore, are not based on those losses environmental, and socioeconomic factors at different scales and hence are distinguished from impact assessment. If an and over time, the vulnerability element becomes crucial in impact assessment has been successfully completed, teams understanding those interactions. are encouraged to include empirical approaches based on attribution/contribution in vulnerability assessments. By POSSIBLE RESULTS: This step will lead to a vulnerability characterizing past drought events’ intensities, duration, and assessment (see figure 3.3), which can help decision-makers associated impacts, teams can link the drought hazard to its prioritize adoption of drought preparedness measures. The consequences in different systems/sectors or areas, identifying vulnerability assessment aims to identify what causes risk and the most vulnerable ones. These attribution/contribution how it is managed in the analyzed areas. assessments help establish linkages and relationships between vulnerability factors and observed impacts (see box 3.8). In any Vulnerability assessments offer a strong entry point for case, empirical approaches to vulnerability assessment can be stakeholder identification and engagement, which can create complemented with modeling of relevant sensitivity and coping/ awareness of the approach, its objectives, and its opportunities adaptive capacity factors. FIGURE 3.3 Exploring Vulnerability in Impact and Vulnerability Assessments Historical DROUGHT Vulnerability Dimensions of Drought drought IMPACTS VULNERABILITY impacts factors vulnerability events PATHWAY Source: Adapted from FAO 2024. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 43 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) BOX 3.8 Multidimensional Vulnerability Assessment for Romania Researchers performed a straightforward vulnerability assessment of all the sectors for which sufficient historical data on impacts were compiled. They ranked highly impacted systems and areas at equivalent drought hazard scores, following the logic of figure B3.8.1. FIGURE B3.8.1 Empirical Estimation of Vulnerability Levels Based on the Impact Experienced at Various Drought Hazard Levels 1 Drought hazard (expressed in probability of exceedance) 0.9 0.8 0.7 Experiencing higher impact than 0.6 expected for that hazard level 0.5 0.4 Experiencing lower impact than expected for that hazard level 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 Quantified impacts Source: Example based on World Bank 2024. Once vulnerability patterns are recognized, they can be compared to socioeconomic indicators, water access, water scarcity levels, types of vegetation and crops, and so on (see figure B3.8.2). Consequently, the drivers of vulnerability are recognized, which in some cases will provide a sense of coping capacities and in other cases will point to sensitivity issues. (box continues next page) 44 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) BOX 3.8 (continued) FIGURE B3.8.2 Creation of Empirical Vulnerability Scores and Maps Based on Attribution of Impacts Magnitude of impacts Patterns are in system A, for compared with crop example, decrease in types, agricultural rainfed agriculture practices, and other production, in socioeconomic moderate droughts values to decipher (e.g., SPEI < -1) drivers of vulnerability Patterns are compared with Magnitude of impacts vegetation types, Values can be in system B, for water stress values, overlayed for example, increase agricultural practices, an aggregate in forest fires, in socioeconomic vulnerability moderate droughts variables etc. indicator (e.g., SPEI < -1) to decipher drivers of vulnerability Patterns are Magnitude of impacts compared with in system C, for water stress values, example, decrease in types of basins, and wetland extension, WRM variables, for in moderate droughts example, to decipher (e.g., SPEI < -1) drivers of vulnerability Source: Example based on World Bank 2024. It is helpful to overlap and combine frameworks to balance out approaches, ensures a more data-driven, informed, and possible strengths and weaknesses, as indicated in table 3.5. holistic understanding of drought vulnerability. However, the Integrating several approaches (King-Okumu 2019), both complexity of the exercise will be conditioned by available indication and attribution-based and empirical and modeling resources and local engagement. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 45 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) TABLE 3.5 Methodologies for Vulnerability Assessment Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Vulnerability Once impacts are Requires a quantitative Inspiration for addressing different assessment assessed, it takes little impact assessment. sectors/systems: based on effort to pinpoint the Might not allow for • Pedro-Monzonís et al. (2016) ranking highly main vulnerable sectors/ linking vulnerability impacted systems systems, crops, areas, • Simelton et al. (2009) levels to characteristics and areas at etc. of sectors/systems, • Bottero et al. (2017) equivalent Data-driven: drought crops, etc. • Kern, Su, and Hill (2020) drought impact data and hazard hazard scores. data comparison helps Attribution identify areas, crops, and See application example in box 3.8. exercise.* sectors that suffer most. Can support distributional impacts identification. Can focus on affected critical facilities. Global drought Visually comparative, Usually focus on References: vulnerability within or among national level. • Carrão, Naumann, and Barbosa maps* countries. Does not always target (2016) Provides a the most drought-prone • IWMI geovisualization portal contextualized initial areas within countries. Mapping Drought Patterns and picture. Vulnerability map does Impacts: A Global Perspective not stand alone without • Gridded Livestock of the World exposure map. (not exclusively for drought vulnerability, more for exposure) • Gridded Population of the World (not exclusively for drought vulnerability, more for exposure) • EU JRC Drought vulnerability indicators for global-scale drought risk assessments • Richts and Vrba (2016) • Zhang and Borja-Vega (2024) Tracking of SDGs* All countries have Focus on national-level Reference: committed, and the datasets. Sustainable Development Report international community Does not always target Portal is positioned to provide the most drought-prone support. areas within countries. Macroeconomic Can explore how much Often overlooks Reference: assessment the economy relies on informal economies. Most PDNAs of droughts include approach water-intensive sectors. Economic assessments subnational description of and attribution Can explore long-term are controversial vulnerabilities based on the macro- exercise* economic effects of and often contested/ economic shocks experienced in the drought on the economy. rejected. target drought event. Relatively fast and Attribution not easy. More advanced application examples: straightforward. • World Bank (2005) • USAID (2018) (table continues next page) 46 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) TABLE 3.5 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Institutional Situates assessment Subjective, political, Application examples: analysis and in governance context. dynamic. • Green Nylen et al. (2018) capacity Provides roadmap for Identifying and assessment design of assessment • Khan, Gao, and Abid (2020) including all relevant process. stakeholders can be Connects well with challenging. block I and with Requires local subsequent building interaction and blocks. feedback (time- consuming). People-centered: Analysis broader than Data-intensive and Application examples: Community- income only. time-consuming. • Limones et al. (2020) based resilience Includes economic Focuses on household and livelihoods • Farahani and Jahansoozi (2002) case at the household scale; may not be assessment level. multi-scale. • Ayantunde, Turner, and Kalilou approach and (2015) other inclusive Can accommodate May not capture long-term time horizon. effects on the national • Ghimire, Shivakoti, and Perret approaches (2010) Considers capacities and regional economy. and different types of May be logistically • Mdemu (2021) sensitivities relevant to challenging. • Scognamillo, Mastrorillo, and drought, linked to basic Representativity Ignaciuk (2022) population metrics. issues. • Buurman, Bui, and Du (2020) Supports distributional In pre-existing conflict • Naumann et al. (2014) impacts identification, situations, can be pinpoints groups at risk. sensitive. Familiar to Frameworks for performing the Often misses assessment: practitioners. identification of Connects to strategic water • UNDP and EC (2016) agroecosystems. management • National Drought Mitigation Center solutions. et al. (2011) • FAO: Guidelines I&V assessments • FAO: Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Analysis Handbook (not focused exclusively on drought; includes case studies using methodology) • PROVIA (2013) • Compilation of useful indicators for this type of approach available within EU JRC drought vulnerability indicators for global-scale drought risk assessments Meza et al. (2018) Some open datasets: • Global Data Lab • IHSN Past household surveys by development partners worldwide • OCHA humanitarian data by development partners worldwide • E-agriculture assessments by FAO (table continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 47 3 . A S S E S S I N G D R O U G H T R I S K ( B LO C K I I ) TABLE 3.5 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Ecosystem- Examines the susceptibility Minimal inclusion of Application examples: based and health of vegetation, poor and marginal • Sultana et al. (2023) agroecological changes in biodiversity groups. • Bahta, Jordaan, and Phatudi-Mphahlele approach and impacts on wildlife Not always (2019) and natural habitats. systematic and • Zhang et al. (2021) Supports distributional more oriented to impacts identification. agriculture than • Tsesmelis et al. (2019) Ensures coverage of other sectors. Frameworks for performing the resource-dependent May not capture assessment: Only for sophisticated production systems. vulnerabilities in versions, often beyond the scope Can connect to climate urban areas. ofDRRAs: models and to economic Focuses on field • Biodiversity, Ecosystems, and models. scale—may not be Landscape Assessment Can be mapped and multi-scale. • Economics of Land Degradation monitored at low cost Relatively short time • System of Environmental-Economic using satellite-derived horizons. Accounting data. Does not consider • Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Many agricultural water needs in Services and Tradeoffs adaptation options likely other sectors of the • FAO (2017) to be identified. economy. Open datasets: • The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) database with country-wide accounting of main ecosystem services • Ecosystem Services Valuation Database Portal • European Drought Observatory (EU JRC Risk of Drought Impacts for Agriculture indicator) • MAES: Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (shapefile and attributes with down scaled ecosystem services in Europe) Water balance Can be performed easily Difficult to apply in Application examples: accounting with water access statistics data-scarce regions. • Serrat-Capdevila et al. (2022, 2023) and basin in the country. Institutional • Karimi, Pareeth, and Michailovsky (2019) management Can capture vulnerability challenges in approach of water resources, • Hoque et al. (2021) coordinating hydrological systems, and data collection, Note: there are many examples in aquifers to drought. management, and the literature; these represent easy Considers water availability analysis. applications, sufficient for a DRRA. and demand across the Data on water economy. extractions often Some open datasets: Can connect to climate incomplete in • AQUASTAT & AQUAMAPS Portal models and scenarios and drought-affected • Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas Data early warning systems. areas. • TerraClimate: Monthly Climate and Can enable identification of May require Climatic Water Balance (available capacity needs. information on in GEE) Can include factors such as groundwater WASH, access to irrigation, management. • Compilation of useful indicators for this or storage availability. type of approach available within EU JRC drought vulnerability indicators for Supports distributional global-scale drought risk assessments impacts identification. Source: World Bank Group. * This methodology can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. 48 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK (BLOCK II) Research conducted at broad scales may overlook local context 3.3. Drought vulnerability assessments will allow the transition and legitimacy, while research conducted at narrow scales to a risk management approach that targets drought resilience can be excessively demanding. Vulnerability assessment measures to the most vulnerable. Furthermore, vulnerability approaches must balance these scales to effectively uncover assessments can be linked to early warning systems, which the underlying causes of distributional impacts, namely, how can support both rapid actions and long-term investments. drought affects diverse groups, systems, or sectors differently depending on their varying degrees of sensitivity and coping/ Data needs: Statistical data, censuses, stakeholder/household adaptive capacity. surveys, interviews, and remote sensing data are needed for vulnerability assessments. King-Okumu (2019) reviews the HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING data sources for assessment of vulnerabilities to droughts. BLOCKS: Vulnerability is a key element in defining risk and Useful indicators are available in the Global Data Lab portal, in is necessary for drought risk mapping. It is fully connected to household surveys by development partners worldwide, and drought impact assessment, in particular, as depicted in figure in UN humanitarian data.13 Notes 1 United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, “Drought Toolbox,” accessed June 11, 2023, https://www.unccd.int/land-and- life/drought/toolbox and Integrated Drought Management Programme, “Monitoring & Early Warning,” https://www.droughtmanagement.info/pillars/monitoring-early-warning/. 2 SPEI (Standardized Precipitation-Evapotranspiration Index), “SPEI Global Drought Monitor.” https://spei.csic.es/map/maps. html#months=1#month=6#year=2024. 3 Tokyo Climate Center and World Meterological Organization Regional Climate Center in RA II (Asia), “ClimatView--A Tool for Viewing Monthly Climate Data, https://ds.data.jma.go.jp/tcc/tcc/products/climate/climatview/frame.php?&s=1&r=0&d=0&y=2019&m=2&e=8& t=0&l=0&k=0&s=1, and International Research Institute, “Global Drought Analysis Tool,” https://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/maproom/ Global/Drought/Global/CPC_GOB/Analysis.html. 4 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, “Earth Observation--Agricultural Stress Index System,” https://www.fao.org/ giews/earthobservation/asis/index_1.jsp?lang=en. 5 SPEI, “Tools,” https://spei.csic.es/tools.html. 6 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “IPCC WGI Interactive Atlas,” https://interactive-atlas.ipcc.ch/. 7 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, “NOAA’s Climate Change Web Portal: CMIP6,” https://psl.noaa.gov/ipcc/cmip6/ and Climate Data Factory, “Climate Data Factory,” https://climate.theclimatedatafactory.com/. 8 World Resources Institute, “Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas,” https://www.wri.org/data/aqueduct-water-risk-atlas. 9 Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut, “KNMI Climate Change Atlas,” https://climexp.knmi.nl/plot_atlas_form.py. 10 World Bank Group, “Climate Change Knowledge Portal,” https://climateknowledgeportal.worldbank.org/. 11 Earth System Grid Federation, “CMIP6,” https://esgf-data.dkrz.de/search/cmip6-dkrz/, and Climate Data Store, “CMIP6 Climate Projections,” https://cds.climate.copernicus.eu/cdsapp#!/dataset/projections-cmip6?tab=overview. 12 United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, “Desinventar Sendai,” https://www.desinventar.net/ and Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disaster, “Public EM-DAT,” https://public.emdat.be/. 13 Global Data Lab, https://globaldatalab.org/; International Household Survey Network, https://catalog.ihsn.org/catalog/?page=1&ps=15; and Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, https://data.humdata.org/dataset. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 49 3. A 2 SCSS OEPS INSI G NG CODO RROD UI G NHAT TI O R IN SKAN (BDLO 4. CCAK PAIC I) ITY (BLOCK I) Evaluation of Current Resilience (Block III) 50 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 4 . E VA L U AT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B L O C K I I I ) H aving assessed the drought risk, the DRRA next FIGURE 4.1 characterizes current drought response and Block III of the Drought Risk and Resilience preparedness, which comprise the main resilience Assessment assessment. Block III calls for two evaluations: one of drought response and the other of drought preparedness (see figure 4.1). These evaluations can use the same methodologies and Block III tools. Nevertheless, their approaches vary in that they focus on different program areas. Evaluate current Program areas represent drought management interventions resilience grounded in the categories of the EPIC Response framework. They provide a comprehensive systematic structure for organizing drought programs, interventions, and potential ■ Evaluate current drought response measures, collectively forming what the World Bank designates as a drought-related Menu of Measures (MoM). ■ Evaluate current drought preparedness Teams conducting DRRAs can use the classification of program areas and specific programs that shape the MoM as a reference to analyze the current status of each of the areas. Source: Original figure for this publication. Characterization of current drought response and preparedness also be applied to other countries, using focus group can take any one of three approaches: discussions and interviews to complete the survey. In its current form, the survey mainly focuses on ■ Desk-based stock-taking of drought response and identifying existing program areas. It should be drought preparedness mechanisms from existing augmented with questions regarding their performance reports. This approach would be possible only if and expanded to include an analysis of capacity gaps sufficient material is online or if deliverables on for implementation. Table 4.1 presents additional similar assessments have been recently developed. assessment frameworks with characteristics and For countries lacking this information, A Multi-Criteria implementation processes similar to those of the Assessment Framework for National Drought Planning EDORA framework. (Alkadir, Pek, and Salman 2022) is a valuable reference. This publication establishes a standardized method for ■ Identification of the relevant stakeholders and reviewing national drought plans and applies this gap program areas and assessment of their level of analysis in more than 30 countries. Additionally, it development and effectiveness. The EPIC Response provides a suite of recommendations for enhancing Assessment Methodology evaluates a country’s these plans. hydro-climatic risk management system by assessing the maturity level of flood and drought risk management ■ In-depth assessment of drought management plans by government counterparts, key experts, and other and climate adaptation actions to address droughts. stakeholders (Deltares 2023). The effort required The European Drought Observatory for Resilience and to conduct interviews and workshops with focus group Adaptation (EDORA) Project has created a methodology discussions can be significant, but a rapid desk review and questionnaire for assessing drought management can also be conducted, as is the case with the other plans and has applied it to EU member states (EU 2023; two approaches. UNCCD 2022c), as illustrated in box 4.1. These tools can DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 51 4 . E VA LUAT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B LO C K I I I ) BOX 4.1 European Union-Wide In-Depth Assessment of Drought Management Plans and Climate Adaptation Actions for Drought The European Drought Observatory for Resilience and Adaptation (EDORA) Project developed a questionnaire for EU members aimed at assessing (1) drought policy frameworks, (2) governance, (3) drought indicators and monitoring, (4) drought management approaches, (5) management of exemptions for the Water Framework Directive, (6) drought measures, (7) cost-benefit analysis, and (8) maturity of the drought management system. The 30-plus questions are often open-ended and allow for clarifications and comments. In some cases, the survey offers pre-determined answers to avoid ambiguity and to facilitate provision of sufficient detail (see figure B4.1.1). Questions on performance and capacity gaps are included. FIGURE B4.1.1 Part of a Questionnaire on the Status of the Drought Policy Framework 2. Drought policy framework 2.1 How is drought management regulated in the EU MS? 2.1.1 Is drought management regulated at national level by ...: a law adopted as primary regulation by parliament? in place under review under development 2.1.2 Does the drought management legislation … Please select one or several of the response options and specify further details (in English): … define a drought (event)? If YES, please specify: … … establish a relationship between droughts and climate change? If YES, please specify: … … establish a relationship or distinction between droughts and water scarcity? If YES, please specify: … … define drought risk? If YES, please specify: … … define a/several competent drought management authority/ies (e.g. river basin administration, regional, district or local administration)? If YES, please specify: … … define drought management actions? If YES, please specify: … … clearly assign the drought management actions to (specific) competent authorities (so in case a drought event shows up, it is clear who does what)? If YES, please specify: … … not address any of the above. 2.2 What is the status of drought management plans? 2.2.1 Are there any specific drought management plans or strategies? 2.2.2 Are there any other strategies or plans that address drought management explicitly? 2.2.3 Is there any national guidance document for drought management? Source: EDORA Project. (box continues next page) 52 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 4 . E VA L U AT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B L O C K I I I ) BOX 4.1 (continued) To ensure consistency in completion of the questionnaire, the EDORA Project team conducted interviews and workshops with relevant agencies and stakeholders in each country. The published survey results identify gaps and areas of intervention across the European Union. TABLE 4.1 Methodologies for Drought Resilience Assessment Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Desk-based Rapid, inexpensive. Heavily reliant on pre- Set of program areas to examine can stock-taking of Easier if target is a existing data accessible be extracted from: drought response country with a national outside of the country. • Menu of Measures (MoM) and drought drought plan already Difficult to assess preparedness • EPIC response framework evaluated through the program area Browder et al. (2021) mechanisms from UNCCD and FAO multi- performance or existing reports* criteria assessment capacity without • Overviews already available for framework for national feedback from local some countries drought planning. stakeholders. Alkadir, Pek, and Salman (2022) In-depth Reflects local Requires roughly 20 Application examples: assessment views and actual days for an experienced • UN-ISDR and SIDA (2008) of drought circumstances. consultant to run management workshops, focus group • Green Nylen et al. (2018) plans and climate discussions, interviews, adaptation and reporting. Evaluation frameworks, checklists, and actions to address questionnaires: Accounting of droughts; EDORA- implemented program • EDORA Project methodology for the like assessment areas needs to be “In-depth assessment of drought complemented with management plans and a report on a discussion on climate adaptation actions against performance and drought in different sectors” capacity gaps. (UNCCD 2022c) • Catalogue of IWRM assessment tools to help assess (1) enabling environment, (2) institutions and participation, (3) management instruments, (4) financing • Urquijo-Reguera et al. (2020) See application example in box 4.1. EPIC response Can reflect local Can take months to be Browder et al. (2021) assessment of views and actual developed and often Program Areas circumstances. requires extensive work relevant to Fully comprehensive by a team (although drought in addressing program more desk-based areas and their reviews are possible): interconnections. workshops, focus group discussions, interviews, Links to flood response/ and reporting. preparedness. Needs to be complemented with a discussion of program area performance. Source: World Bank Group. * This methodology can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 53 4 . E VA LUAT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B LO C K I I I ) These qualitative and generally straightforward approaches eligible for its climate resilience funding programs can be do not require profound expertise. However, providing a insightful for evaluating a country’s standing regarding drought comprehensive picture of existing and enforced programs response and preparedness.1 at different scales can be resource-demanding and time- consuming. Government endorsement and engagement of All approaches can involve mapping of relevant institutions local stakeholders are essential. and stakeholders in the drought management system, if not performed thoroughly in the first block, and an assessment of Importantly, the lending toolkit used by the International different capacity dimensions: institutional; knowledge, data, Monetary Fund to assess a country’s preparedness to become and technology innovation; human and communities; Thomas Nyarugwe / GOAL Global / USAID 54 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 4 . E VA L U AT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B L O C K I I I ) and financial. Some previous capacity gap assessments can The analyses undertaken for block III must include an evaluation inform the surveys to be performed and the questionnaires of the performance of the different program areas. Figure 4.2 to be developed. Such assessments include the USAID depicts the structure of the MoM, offering a detailed, though not report for the Caribbean region (USAID 2022) and a report exhaustive, overview of the programs that should be in place in by the Government of Nepal (MoFE 2020). A toolkit to assess a comprehensive drought management system.3 Importantly, capacity gaps and needs to implement the Paris Agreement this MoM is merely an illustrative example of how a drought 2 can also guide the exercise. Any relevant results of the management system is organized; other similar compendiums Capacity Gaps Assessment program of the UN-Water SDG 6 and classifications of drought-related interventions and Capacity Development Initiative can be indicative. Finally, an programs—for example, the EDORA classification and the assessment application developed by Khan, Gao, and Abid Integrated Drought Management Programme’s three pillars— (2020) can serve as an example. can be equally relevant as a reference for DRRAs. FIGURE 4.2 Illustrative Example of the Menu of Measures Sectoral frameworks ENABLING MEASURES ■ Drought management laws and policies ■ Water resources management laws and policies ■ Water supply and sanitation laws and policies ■ Agriculture and irrigation laws and policies ■ Disaster risk management and disaster finance laws and policies (incl. drought risk financing mechanisms and instruments) Hydrometeorological services ■ National framework for meteorological and hydrological services ■ Drought monitoring and early warning systems ■ Drought vulnerability and impact assessment ■ National water data ■ Forecasting and modeling for water services ■ Agrometeorological advisory services ■ National climate assessment Drought risk mitigation and contingency planning PLANNING MEASURES ■ National planning ■ Integrated Water Resources Management plans and integrated basin plans, including storage planning ■ Cities and urban water supply planning ■ Irrigation water supply planning ■ Coastal planning (figure continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 55 4 . E VA LUAT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B LO C K I I I ) FIGURE 4.2 (continued) Nature-based solutions INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES ■ Watershed management and restoration ■ Groundwater recharge ■ Forest management and restoration ■ Wetlands/floodplain management and restoration Water infrastructure ■ Water resources, including storage and conveyance infrastructure, rehabilitation, and retrofits ■ Agricultural water-use efficiency programs ■ Water supply and sanitation network expansion and efficiency ■ “New Water,” including desalination, water treatment, and water reuse ■ Alternative sanitation technologies, such as dry toilets, waterless urinals, and container-based solutions CONTROL Water allocation and groundwater management MEASURES ■ Flexible water allocation ■ Water pricing ■ Integrated water resources management ■ Conjunctive groundwater management RESPONSE Drought response and recovery MEASURES ■ National drought response ■ Urban drought response ■ Water resources management drought response ■ Agriculture drought response ■ Drought response for pastoral communities ■ Social protection drought response WHOLE-OF- ■ Local government and utilities SOCIETY ■ Public participation and stakeholder engagement MEASURES ■ Social inclusion ■ Public awareness and risk communication ■ Scientific collaboration with universities, local governments, research centers, and nongovernmental organizations Source: Original figure for this publication. 56 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 4 . E VA L U AT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B L O C K I I I ) 4.1 Evaluating Current HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING BLOCKS: Comparing the effectiveness of existing response Drought Response strategies (block III) to the drought risk characterization (block II) provides a full account of systems and areas requiring WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: improvement and indicates where more response resource A strengths and weaknesses assessment will quickly identify the allocation is needed. By integrating the findings from both existence of any disaster response strategies that are effective assessments, decision-makers can prioritize and develop a in mitigating impacts. Understanding the strengths of these well-informed and targeted drought risk response strategy. strategies allows for their reinforcement and replication in other areas of vulnerability. Identifying weaknesses in the current drought response provides insights into the potential allocation 4.2 Evaluating Current of resources for improving that response. The assessment Drought Preparedness may reveal strengths and weaknesses in existing policies and governance structures that can inform adjustments. WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: Evaluating the current functionality of drought preparedness POSSIBLE RESULTS: This assessment will identify the provides insights into necessary actions. Successful drought strengths and weaknesses of the current drought response preparedness requires cross-sectoral coordination, which through a gap analysis and will develop a preliminary list of national drought policies can support. National-level drought possible investment areas. These areas may include essential preparedness can be further categorized into efforts for river policy or institutional actions suitable for development policy basins and for sectors. financing, as well as critical investments needed to build the physical and social infrastructure required for effective POSSIBLE RESULTS: This assessment will identify drought response. the strengths and weaknesses of the current drought preparedness through a gap analysis and will develop a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) preliminary list of possible investment areas. These areas may analysis or PESTEL (political, economic, social, technological, include essential policy or institutional actions suitable for environmental, and legal) analysis—a tool used to identify the development policy financing, as well as critical investments macro (external) forces facing an organization—could both be needed to build the physical and social infrastructure required produced to identify barriers to and areas for improvement in for effective drought preparedness. drought response. SWOT analysis, PESTEL analysis, and similar displays could be This sub-block should ideally focus on the following program produced to identify barriers to and areas for improvement in areas (as listed in the MoM): drought preparedness. ■ Hydrometeorological services that pertain to The DRRA team should be able to point to specific areas where drought monitoring and response technical, financial, and human resources for preparedness ■ Drought risk mitigation and contingency planning can be optimized and where capacity-building efforts, such as droughts unfold as training for local officials or the development of new management protocols, are needed. It also should be able to ■ Drought response and recovery programs point to necessary improvements in communication channels or in utilization of available data to inform decisions and DATA NEEDS: A strengths and weaknesses assessment resource allocation. of drought response requires policies, sector-specific plans, drought risk management policies and plans, previous reports, This sub-block should focus on analyzing the performance of and PDNAs. the following program areas (as listed in the MoM): DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 57 4 . E VA LUAT I O N O F C U R R E N T R E S I L I E N C E ( B LO C K I I I ) ■ Sectoral frameworks DATA NEEDS: A strengths and weaknesses assessment of drought preparedness requires policies, sector-specific plans, ■ Hydrometeorological services that pertain to risk previous reports, and PDNAs. characterization, drought early warning systems, drought communication, and so on HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING BLOCKS: Comparing the effectiveness of existing ■ Drought risk mitigation and contingency planning preparedness strategies (block III) to the drought risk ■ Nature-based solutions characterization (block II) provides a full account of systems and areas requiring improvement and indicates where ■ Water infrastructure increased resource allocation for drought preparedness is needed. By integrating the findings from both assessments, ■ Water allocation and groundwater management decision-makers can prioritize and develop a well-informed and targeted drought preparedness strategy. ■ Other aspects of the whole-of-society approach: census and statistics availability, participation, education, and drought risk communication, and so on Notes 1 International Monetary Fund, “Resilience and Sustainability Trust,” https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/Resilience-and-Sustainability-Trust. 2 Paris Committee on Capacity Building, “PCCB Toolkit to Assess Capacity Building Gaps and Needs to Implement the Paris Agreement,” https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/bodies/constituted-bodies/paris-committee-on-capacity-building-pccb/areas-of- work/capacity-building-portal/pccb-toolkit-to-assess-capacity-gaps-and-needs-to-implement-the-paris-agreement. 3 For World Bank staff, a more expansive and continuously updated internal tool links program areas and programs to specific World Bank methodologies and projects as these methodologies and projects are being developed and implemented. 58 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 3. A 2 SCSS OEPS INSI G NG CODO RROD UI G NHAT TI O R IN SKAN (BDLO 5. CCAK PAIC I) ITY (BLOCK I) Prioritizing Areas for Action (Block IV) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 59 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E A S F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) T he final phase of the DRRA draws from the results FIGURE 5.1 of all the preceding building blocks to inform the Block IV of the Drought Risk and Resilience prioritization of potential measures (block IV [see Assessment figure 5.1]). WHY THIS BUILDING BLOCK IS IMPORTANT: Block IV Building block IV strengthens efficient allocation of limited resources by focusing efforts and investments on measures where they can have the most significant impact in reducing Prioritize areas drought risk and enhancing resilience, thereby realizing for action long-term cost savings. It is aimed at identifying areas where opportunities for drought risk reduction exist, presenting the benefits these opportunities could provide, and justifying ■ Prioritize measures to reduce drought potential investments. Analyses of these investments must risks and increase drought resilience reflect social and environmental, not just economic, benefits, as well as indirect benefits and co-benefits. Regarding this point, finance ministries, particularly in regions susceptible to various Source: Original figure for this publication. risks, may find it challenging to concentrate exclusively on a single hazard, so it is important to identify where preparing for drought can yield benefits that extend beyond mitigating the to drought response and preparedness in building block III, it impact of drought. Doing so is consistent with the messages of must engage stakeholders and relevant agencies at different the EPIC Response framework. levels in portfolio discussions to ascertain their perspectives on the desirability, feasibility, and adequacy of investing in the POSSIBLE RESULTS: Block IV ideally yields a list identified options. of potential priority measures and interventions, and a quantification or a narrative about their costs and benefits. Some benefits of interventions identified in the MoM might This block can be pivotal in shaping financing decisions for not be immediately apparent to stakeholders, so identifying, World Bank member countries. It can support World Bank quantifying, and demonstrating them could prove illuminating. development policy financing and the design of related prior The team may propose additional or more specific interventions, actions, which together underpin the policy and institutional which should also undergo assessment. Furthermore, the reforms necessary to enhance drought management. It can team could apply straightforward decision support tools support World Bank investment project financing and Program- to identify a set of feasible options to present to the client. for-Results financing by identifying adequate investments in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is one such valuable physical and social infrastructure, as well as management approach, which incorporates nuanced understanding of improvements, that enhance drought resilience. factors influencing infrastructure choices and often involves GIS overlaying. World Bank Advisory Services and Analytics, At this point, the team engaged in the DRRA will have or ASA, work in Angola has applied MCDA to determine successfully pinpointed the specific regions, systems, and suitable types of water supply infrastructure and to evaluate sectors susceptible to risk and impacts. In addition, the team the potential of a set of nature-based solutions at the scale of will have identified areas with a pressing need to contemplate four provinces (Limones et al. 2024). potential drought preparedness and response measures. Narrowing the application of the time-intensive assessment In general terms, it is essential to evaluate the long-term tools in this building block to these areas is essential. After the benefits of a program or project to contrast them with its costs. team, guided by the categories included in the MoM, assesses Recognizing the benefits entails comparing project outcomes the performance of the program areas and programs related with expected drought impacts in a scenario in which no action 60 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E AS F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) is implemented—the “inaction scenario,” making the expected All the approaches compiled in these guidelines, and some impacts the “costs of inaction.” Evaluation of expected impacts additional approaches, are included in the table 5.1. is performed in sub-block 6 of the DRRA. When applicable, the benefits of the intervention should be compared with Apart from their economic gains, drought risk interventions expected drought impacts in a scenario in which an alternative could offer a range of direct and indirect social benefits project is selected. that need to be identified and valued to the extent possible, even if predominantly through qualitative means. These Ideally, multiple methodological approaches are used to assess benefits include enhancing community resilience by the benefits of drought resilience projects. A combination fostering cooperation and self-reliance, improving public of assessments can be guided by table 5.1, wherein the health through better access to clean and reliable water enumerated strengths and weaknesses offer insights into how and increased food security and nutrition, promoting social specific tools may complement one another. equity and empowerment by addressing the needs of vulnerable populations and groups, increasing (or maintaining) Importantly, drought’s gradual onset and prolonged duration educational opportunities, diversifying livelihoods to enhance require assessment methodologies that can capture the economic security, and preserving cultural practices and evolution and accumulation of impacts and the benefits of the traditions. Social return on investment (SROI) can help proposed intervention over time. Furthermore, drought exhibits quantify the social value generated by drought management nuanced, indirect ramifications that present greater challenges projects, measuring social outcomes in monetary terms. SROI in terms of quantification when compared with other hazards. approaches should rely on participatory methods to involve These ramifications tend to diffuse temporally and spatially, local communities in identifying and evaluating the social spreading across sectors and systems, necessitating a benefits of the interventions. meticulous delineation of the causal chain of effects as a base to evaluate the indirect benefits of programs. The reduction in In addition to social advantages, drought risk interventions vulnerability to future droughts in these sectors and systems could yield significant environmental benefits. These should be measured as an indirect benefit. In particular, it is measures encompass ecosystem restoration and biodiversity important to look at potentially positive externalities that might enhancement, surface and groundwater resource management occur when the benefits of an action spill over to third parties that enhances water quality and availability, contributions to who are not directly responsible for that action. In the case climate change mitigation and adaptation, soil conservation of mitigating drought impacts, positive externalities might to reduce erosion and degradation, efficient water use manifest as a stable food supply, health benefits, climate leading to conservation, reduced habitat destruction and land change mitigation, and so on. degradation, and the enhancement of ecosystem services such as water regulation, carbon sequestration, and pollination Economic analysis allows policymakers to prioritize investments reduction. However, relying solely on environmental benefits by pinpointing cost-effective strategies, ensuring optimal as the primary motivation for an intervention may be difficult resource allocation. It assesses trade-offs among various to justify to clients, so ecosystem service (ES) assessments, options amid resource competition, quantifies both direct and especially for infrastructure-related investments, are useful indirect impacts, evaluates policy effectiveness, and fosters for block IV. Experts can use ES assessments to model the collaborative decision-making among diverse stakeholders. process through which an action results in a specific outcome The World Bank and California’s Water Authority (2023) and can subsequently assess the benefits provided by such have developed Guidelines for Drought Risk Management– an outcome by looking at physical and social indicators that Economic Methods, Models and Tools, which comprehensively are of significance. gathers methodologies and explains application modalities for evaluating drought programs. The guidelines present the need The World Bank developed guidelines for assessing costs to incorporate different dimensions (Vermeulen et al. 2023) and benefits, offering methods, a specific decision framework, in benefit-cost analysis (BCA) or cost-effectiveness analysis). and practical case studies to help developers of nature- DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 61 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E A S F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) TABLE 5.1 Methodologies for Prioritizing Potential Investments Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Drought Resilience, Analyzes stakeholders Lack of specificity in Crossman (2018) Adaptation and acceptability. actual solutions for Management Policy Valuable for the initial certain regions or sectors. (DRAMP) Framework screening of options. Susceptible to dominant (or similar voices bias. Often not framework) Inclusive. based on quantitative data Discussion with Contextualized or rigor. stakeholders, understanding. Meaningful stakeholder with Delphi+ Incorporates qualitative discussions can be assessment or insights and evolving resource-intensive. other assessments priorities. (participatory decision-making)* Menu of Measasures Same benefits as DRAMP. Same weaknesses as See figure 4.2. discussion with DRAMP, but it is more stakeholders, with specific. Delphi or other assessments (participatory decision-making)* Multi-Criteria Data-driven. Data-intensive. Top-down approaches for Analysis (MCA) Normally does not involve Can reflect incomplete narrowing down programs complex modeling. or subjective criteria/ to debate with the client/ feedback. stakeholders: Comprehensive. Assumes independency • FAO Decision Support for Can incorporate qualitative Mainstreaming and Scaling Out and quantitative data. among criteria and is less valid in complex decision Sustainable Land Management Flexible in scales and contexts. • Serrat-Capdevila et al. (2023) approaches. Does not capture the • Alkadir, Pek, and Salman (2022) When applied at the initial long-term and cascading stage, can help narrow down effects of interventions. Approaches for evaluating options for the client. specific programs with Robustness of the When applied to analyze results can be sensitive stakeholders’ feedback: a concrete program, it to changes in criteria • Ruangpan et al. (2021) considers multiple benefits weightings and data and trade-offs. • Appendix G of California inputs. Department of Water Often purely technical and Resources (2014) data-driven. Cost-effectiveness Analyzes economic Does not provide References: analysis efficiency. a comprehensive • Guimarães Nobre et al. (2019) Alternative method to comparison of all costs and benefits. • Kumar et al. (2021) benefit-cost analysis (BCA) when data for benefits are Weaknesses similar to • Zou et al. (2013) not available or benefits are those of BCA. hard to quantify or monetize. Simple. Focuses on costs and identifies budget-efficient options. (table continues next page) 62 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E AS F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) TABLE 5.1 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Ecosystem Focused on environmental Data-intensive. InVEST (Integrated services (ES) benefits, but indirectly on Medium complexity. Valuation of Ecosystem valuation society, through services. Services and Tradeoffs) Assigning monetary values Co-benefits can be analyzed. to ecosystem services often Scenario evaluation is involves subjective judgments. possible. Monetary valuation does not Can be customized. capture all benefits and costs Incorporates quantitative associated with ES. and qualitative aspects. Regional economic Some applications are easy Data-intensive. Input-output analysis: analyses to use, especially those for Purely economic. • Impact Planning (IMPLAN) input-output analysis. model Assigning monetary values Cross-sectoral analyses of to non-market values like • Kang et al. (2019) benefits. environmental aspects is • Regional Input-Output Captures intersectoral challenging. Modeling System (RIMS II) relationships within the May not fully capture the regional economy. long-term benefits of certain Computable general drought management equilibrium models: strategies, such as those related to climate resilience. Regional Economic Modeling Incorporated (REMI) system Equity and Analyzes social effects of Data-intensive. Distributional impact analysis distributional interventions. Complex. application examples: effects analyses Flexible in scales and • Williams et al. (2020) Does not include approaches. environmental considerations. • El-Khattabi et al. (2021) Can capture systemic May not fully capture the interconnections. long-term benefits of certain Social welfare function: drought management • Adler (2019) strategies. Sustainability impact assessment: OECD (2010) BCA and weighted Analyzes economic efficiency. Data-intensive. References: benefit-cost Data-driven. Focuses on quantitative • World Bank (2010) analysis (WBCA) inputs/outputs. Comprehensive. • Fennell et al. (2023) Structured quantitative Incorporating the scales of • Arena et al. (2014) comparison (monetized). the drought and its impacts requires many assumptions. Long-term planning scenarios and uncertainty BCA may oversimplify the and risk analysis is possible. complex nature of drought management. Transparent. Assigning monetary values Considers multiple benefits to non-market values is and trade-offs. challenging. Applying social equity May not fully capture the weights in WBCA captures long-term benefits of certain distributional concerns. strategies, such as those Incorporating SROI enriches related to climate resilience. the analysis. (table continues next page) DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 63 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E A S F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) TABLE 5.1 (continued) Methodology Budget Time Effort Strengths Weaknesses Reference Climate Analyzes climate resilience. Data-intensive. References: adaptation Promotes robust decision making In some cases, focuses • Noleppa and Agripol– assessments/ under uncertainty. more on assessing Network for Policy Advice DMDU GbR (2013) Guides strategic and operational performance of a program than on exposing specific • Rouillard et al. (2016) choices, highlighting potential conflicts and opportunities. drought resilience benefits. • Tröltzsch et al. (2016) • Kalra et al. (2015) • Ward et al. (2022) Water Analyzes climate resilience and Data-intensive, especially Water Evaluation and Planning: Evaluation water security. to fully include the scales Selected Publications and Planning Comprehensive analysis of of the drought, its impacts, and management. complex water systems. Complex. Scenario evaluation. May not fully capture Can be customized. the long-term benefits Includes drought hazard of certain drought characteristics. management strategies. Includes quantitative and Assumption of rational qualitative aspects. decision-making. Spontaneous factors not Transparent. included. Considers multiple benefits and Not the only water systems trade-offs. software tool available. System Focused on complex systems Data-intensive. Tools: Dynamics understanding. Medium complexity. • Vensim Modeling Informs adaptive management. Difficult to communicate; • Isee systems Cross-sectoral analyses of not as transparent as other benefits and co-benefits captures approaches. intersectoral relationships, Application examples: Calibration and validation delays, accumulations, nonlinear • Sušnik et al. (2012) linkages, and feedback loops. is necessary but is difficult and resource-intensive. • Li et al. (2022) Can be customized. Incorporates quantitative and qualitative aspects. Can accommodate long- term planning scenarios and uncertainty and risk. NbS Data-driven. Focused only on a type of Tools range from databases built on intervention Identifies and evaluates NbS investment (NbS). peer-reviewed literature to interactive identification interventions. Data-intensive. web-based tools, calculator tools, and and spatial simulation models. Mixed approaches: Some tools Medium complexity. evaluation Tools: focus on identifying suitable Weaknesses described for • NbS Evidence Platform interventions, mainly based on MCA apply here as well. MCA. Others already provide • NbS Benefits Explorer cost-benefit analysis or support • Water-Proof the design of specific types of • Natural water retention measures NbS. • CUBHIC • FIESTA-FOGINT • InVEST • Soil Water Assessment Tool • Spatial Process in Hydrology • Water Harvesting Explorer • Sustainable Asset Valuation • Limones et al. (2024) Source: World Bank Group. + A Delphi assessment is a structured forecasting or consensus-building technique that utilizes expert opinions through iterative surveys (Crisp et al. 1997). * These methodologies can be utilized even without specialized expertise or resources for more in-depth analyses. 64 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E AS F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) based solutions projects (Van Zanten et al. 2023). Importantly, planning, helping teams examine the impact of policy and the World Bank outlined a methodological framework for management interventions within a system. System dynamics assessing the benefits of action and costs of inaction (BACI) models can help to understand how droughts propagate analysis in drought preparedness and mitigation (Venton et through economic mechanisms and can help them identify al. 2019). The framework points to some tools and explains and simulate complex interactions among drought conditions, how BACI analysis—encompassing economic, social, and potential interventions and measures, labor, productivity, and environmental dimensions—can be embedded in the overall economic resilience. The effectiveness of drought programs development of a drought risk management strategy. It aims and policy instruments will be affected by broader ecological, to guide authorities and stakeholders in formulating the right socioeconomic, and institutional mechanisms, which should questions at various stages. The approaches compiled in be taken into account. these guidelines are included in table 5.1. Climate adaptation assessments and Decision Making Under In an advanced approach to building block IV, practitioners Deep Uncertainty (DMDU) methodologies help practitioners must also assess how measures designed for drought consider multiple uncertainties, including future climate resilience could unintentionally increase or decrease the risk change, and how to identify the most robust set of solutions from another hazard as well as identify co-benefits that could for managing them. The World Bank has published several be obtained. For these purposes, system dynamics models are guidelines on this topic (World Bank 2020; Bonzanigo et very useful because they can effectively represent the complex al. 2018); DMDU-related approaches in Vallejo and Mullan interactions and feedback loops within a project’s system, (2017) and the Climate Risk Informed Decision Analysis which operate at different spatial and temporal scales. These are also beneficial for realizing these objectives. However, models allow for a holistic understanding of how various natural while complementary, these DMDU tools frequently exceed and human factors interact to produce outcomes, including the temporal constraints and resource allocations typically potentially positive impacts. The models enable scenario designated for DRRAs. World Bank DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 65 5 . P R I O R I T I Z I N G A R E A S F O R AC T I O N ( B LO C K I V ) DATA NEEDS: Prioritizing potential investments requires: ■ Information on potential resilience-building interventions ■ Input, feedback, and opinions from agencies and stakeholders through surveys or interviews ■ Cost estimates and resource requirements for each investment option, including initial investments and operational costs ■ Cost estimates for the impacts identified in previous building blocks ■ Historical economic accounts, disaggregated ■ Water demand data for various sectors ■ Historical environmental monitoring data, such as water quantity and quality measurements, biodiversity assessments, and habitat data to measure outcomes/ effectiveness of similar projects/investment options in times of drought ■ Market prices and cost data for goods and services related to the ecosystem services. ■ Data collected through surveys, interviews, or other methods to assess the non-market value of ecosystem services ■ Historical socioeconomic indicators on different population groups or communities, such as employment rates, income levels and distribution, and poverty rates to measure outcomes in similar projects/investment options HOW THIS BLOCK RELATES TO OTHER BUILDING BLOCKS: Building block IV closes the DRRA and requires data and results from all the other building blocks. It allows identified solutions to be analyzed in-depth and discussed with clients for prioritization and implementation. Adventist Drought and Relief Agency / USAID 66 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY CLOSING REMARKS Jorge E. Martínez Santamaría / USAID Closing Remarks T he DRRA framework summarized in this report rep- comprehensively identify and prioritize drought resilience resents a comprehensive approach to understanding measures. and proactively addressing drought risk. Its primary focus is to provide guidance on identifying drought management It is anticipated that both the DRRA framework and this report needs and opportunities while supporting enhancement of will undergo further refinement and enhancement, informed by existing drought management systems. feedback and practical experience. Ongoing and forthcoming applications of the DRRA in diverse national and regional Importantly, the DRRA framework encourages the collaboration contexts are essential for iteratively adjusting the approach, of partners, governmental institutions, and any stakeholders thereby improving its utility as a guide for users in selecting and involved in drought risk management and benefiting from applying the appropriate tools and methodologies in each of the drought resilience measures. Tailoring the DRRA to the DRRA building blocks. application context allows teams to maximize its benefits. World Bank teams and all relevant entities are encouraged The DRRA methodology recommends and directs teams to familiarize themselves with the framework and to explore to existing methodologies, tools, and resources that can opportunities for its implementation with the objective of complement and form the basis for the DRRA implementation strengthening global drought resilience. in the given country or region. Ideally, the DRRA is conducted in conjunction and close collaboration with other ongoing For further information or clarifications, please contact the initiatives and complements these initiatives as needed to Global Department for Water at the World Bank. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 67 APPENDIX A Appendix A Embedding the DRRA within Existing Frameworks T he DRRA methodology was developed to provide wealth of resources, serving to organize and complement them guidance for a systematic analysis of drought risk in providing an approach to operationalize a shift to more and the identification and prioritization of drought proactive drought management. Table A.1 provides an overview resilience measures. The methodology is built on the existing of existing resources and the ways the DRRA complements them. TABLE A.1 World Bank Resources and Methodologies Complemented and Supported by the DRRA Assessment Complementarities and synergies Assessing Drought This report was developed by the World Bank, GFDRR, Deltares, the University of California at Santa Barbara, Hazard and Risk: the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the National Drought Mitigation Principles and Center, and IHE-Delft. It informs the DRRA, especially block ll, highlighting many synergies in terms of hazard Implementation identification, future trends, vulnerabilities, and exposure/impacts. In addition, the report emphasizes the need Guidance (World Bank for a scoping phase, which block I of the DRAA elaborates on and strengthens by encouraging assessment 2019) of the implementing agency’s readiness and by promoting partnerships with other organizations and donors active in the space. Moreover, the DRRA advances consideration of drought management practices, specifically by reviewing current drought responses and preparedness (block III) and prioritizing investment options (block lV). EPIC Response This report was jointly developed by the World Bank and Deltares. It focuses on assessing and developing framework programs that support management of hydro-climatic risks, namely floods and droughts. The EPIC Response An EPIC Response: framework advocates for managing both floods and droughts in conjunction because they are both hydro- Innovative Governance climatic risks at the opposite ends of the extremes. Thereby, it analyses a collection of programs focusing for Flood and Drought on either floods, droughts, or both of them in tandem, ultimately supporting the creation of a more effective Risk Management governance system through suggested institutional upgrades. (Browder et al. 2021) The report is an important reference for the DRRA. It significantly informs the accompanying Menu of Measures (MoM). The programs related to drought management are particularly relevant to the DRRA and are initial reference points for comprehensively assessing current drought responses and preparedness. Coupled with the risk assessment, drought response and preparedness assessment allow for a gap analysis that consequently informs the identification of drought risk and resilience measures. The MoM developed by the World Bank and provided in block lll borrowed and adapted the EPIC Response framework program areas to the specific scope of drought management. Country Climate and The World Bank launched the Country Climate and Development Reports (CCDRs) in 2022 to support alignment Development Reports of sustainable development priorities and climate change risks. The objective is to identify and prioritize actions (CCDRs) to strengthen adaptation and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, ultimately contributing to climate-resilient The Development, development. The World Bank plans to provide CCDR assessments to all client countries. Climate, and Nature When developing a DRRA, practitioners should consider outputs from CCDRs that were conducted in the Crisis: Solutions to End respective country or region and vice versa. Results of the CCDRs and DRRAs can inform one another and Poverty on a Livable support the identification of priorities, climate change hotspots, and trends. CCDRs represent an opportunity Planet—Insights to incorporate drought modeling and analysis of future trends to inform drought risk management. CCDRs are from World Bank based on the analysis of a range of climate change scenarios to highlight the potential impacts of climate change Country Climate and across society, ecosystems, and the economy, potentially including impacts on drought occurrence and severity. Development Reports Covering 42 Economies Like the CCDRs, DRRAs aim to provide a multi-sectoral lens on drought risk and resilience, thereby focusing on (World Bank Group 2023) collaboration across disciplines and sectors. However, the DRRA is different from a CCDR in that it provides a deep dive on drought-specific risks to sustainable development priorities and on ways to strengthen drought resilience through the identification and prioritization of investments. CCDRs pursue a similar objective but focus more broadly on climate change risks in addition to climate change mitigation opportunities. (table continues next page) 68 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY APPENDIX A TABLE A.1 (continued) Assessment Complementarities and synergies Adaptation and The Adaptation and Resilience (A&R) Diagnostic is a framework and indicator-based scoring tool Resilience Diagnostic developed and applied by the World Bank’s Climate Change Group. The diagnostic evaluates progress and identifies gaps and priorities for climate adaptation and resilience. Additionally, it is a guide for designing adaptation and resilience-building strategies. The diagnostic aims to support and track adaptation policy development and implementation. It has been applied in conjunction with CCDR reports. Like the DRRA, the A&R Diagnostic aims to facilitate broader client and country dialogue and bring together multi-sectoral stakeholders. However, the DRRA is more targeted in that it focuses specifically on identifying measures to strengthen drought risk and resilience, whereas the diagnostic’s whole-of-society approach aims to capture a plethora of measures needed to adapt to climate change. The diagnostic is underpinned by 190 indicators that capture universal principles for effective climate change adaptation. The diagnostic includes a traffic-light rating system that evaluates each indicator qualitatively and quantitively. Like the CCDR, DRRA results can inform A&R diagnostics and vice versa. Water Security The Water Security Diagnostic (WSD) methodology provides a framework for understanding the key Diagnostic cause-and-effect relationships among water endowment, sector architecture, sector performance, (World Bank 2021b) and water security outcomes. Additionally, a complete WSD looks beyond the present situation and considers the key stresses on changing water security years and even decades into the future, the country’s aspirations for water security improvement, and ways these aspirations can be fulfilled in the face of the key stresses. A WSD is a time-intensive undertaking that delivers significant and long-lasting impact. It usually involves modeling and analysis of scenarios or options for reform, investment, or both to improve future water security, considering demographic, economic, and climate change projections. A DRRA and WSD are complementary: the former provides a deep dive on drought risk, and the latter positions that risk within the broader water security context. Sectoral Deep Dives The DRRA complements and is compatible with sector-specific frameworks. More specifically, studies that focus on the selected economic sectors and types of interventions that can mitigate drought impacts and foster resilience are relevant links with a DRRA and can inform one another. The World Bank’s What the Future Has in Store: A New Paradigm for Water Storage focuses on addressing the global water storage gap. Water storage, in general, be it green, grey, or hybrid, is a crucial measure that allows water banking for dry periods and thus ensures water availability for different types of uses (Burke et al. 2023). Other sector-specific drought risk studies that provide suggestions for measures to increase resilience include the review of Salvador et al. (2023) on the health implications of droughts. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 69 APPENDIX B Appendix B Examples of NbS Interventions for Drought Resilience in Latin America and the Caribbean B uilding drought resilience is only possible when locations, forest types, and climate conditions, reforestation assessments and analytics inform measures to reduces annual water yields due to vegetation’s increased strengthen and develop institutional structures, which soil water access and transpiration (Filoso et al. 2017). in turn form the basis for infrastructure investments. Importantly, Notably, increased landscape transpiration after revegetation grey, green, and hybrid interventions must all be considered. also enhances atmospheric moisture recycling, leading to increased precipitation either locally or elsewhere in the Numerous case studies and publications attest to the potential of “precipitationshed” (Keys et al. 2014). Even if annual water yield nature-based solutions (NbS) to contribute to water security, thus somewhat decreases, reforestation’s regulation of flow often addressing drought risk (Vigerstol et al. 2023). However, grey benefits downstream water uses by steadying availability. infrastructure typically receives more attention. Even within the realm of NbS for water security, application of grey infrastructure The relation between reforestation and drought resilience for flood management is prominent. To facilitate and support the is complex. At present, a comprehensive understanding is implementation of NbS for drought management, six fact sheets limited by the prevailing research focus on exotic species (forthcoming) for distinct interventions were developed as part and by insufficient local evidence (Filoso et al. 2017). of the regional application of the DRRA in the Latin America Reforestation’s impacts on drought risk depend, in part, on the and Caribbean region. Following is an excerpt of the NbS for type of forest restored and the density of tree cover (Ilstedt each intervention, provided to highlight its potential role and et al. 2016). Restoration of cloud forests is considered highly contributions to attaining water security and drought resilience. beneficial to drought resilience (The Nature Conservancy Although these fact sheets were developed with a focus on the 2023; Liu et al. 2021). Latin America and Caribbean region, they are relevant to other regions, and they can be complemented by other types of NbS WETLAND PROTECTION AND RESTORATION interventions. Wetlands provide important natural regulatory functions, storing floodwaters and maintaining surface water flow during dry Selected NbS for managing drought risk follow. periods. Wetland restoration involves the re-establishment of the hydrology, plants, and soils of former or degraded wetlands REFORESTATION that have been drained, farmed, or otherwise modified (The Reforestation involves the restoration of native forest habitat in Nature Conservancy and Agence Francaise de Developpement, areas where this habitat has been degraded or lost. In general, n.d.). Wetland restoration can involve removal of artificial two different reforestation approaches can be distinguished: structures or blocking of drainage systems to re-establish (1) active reforestation, which introduces native tree species natural hydrology, construction of check dams or other erosion using seedlings or seeds, and (2) passive measures, which control structures, revegetation with native species, excavation aim to create a suitable enabling environment for natural of upland soils, and other efforts. Wetland protection focuses on regeneration. Afforestation, not included in the description ensuring the integrity of wetlands through measures that inhibit below, is considered when growing trees in an area that was wetland degradation and allow for the continuous provision of not previously covered by trees. ecosystem services. New trees generally enhance local infiltration through Healthy wetlands capture and store water, thus carrying water changes in above- and below-ground vegetation. However, from wet periods over to dry periods and allowing more water reforestation’s impacts on water availability depend strongly to infiltrate the soil. Depending on the surface or subsurface on temporal and spatial scales. In many geographical waters to which they connect, wetlands can increase baseflows 70 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY APPENDIX B and groundwater levels, thus enhancing water users’ drought context of drought risk reduction, AgBMPs that conserve water resilience (Deltares 2022). Wetlands’ water retention and supply by enhancing infiltration and reducing runoff are particularly differs widely among ecological and climatological systems. relevant. These AgBMPs include cover cropping, strip cropping, If the local context is sufficiently considered in its design and contour farming, terracing, grassed waterways, contour buffer implementation, wetland restoration can successfully reduce strips, mulching, and agroforestry (Pan et al. 2018). hydrological drought risk (Vigerstol et al. 2023). The World Resources Institute report Nature-Based Solutions in NATURAL AND HYBRID SURFACE AND Latin America and The Caribbean: Regional Status and Priorities SUBSURFACE WATER STORAGE for Growth makes mention of agroforestry and farmland best practices as two of the most applied NbS in the Latin America This category of NbS includes water storage and harvesting and Caribbean region to enhance water availability (Ozment et options that utilize spaces in the water and soil system for al. 2021). Factors such as location, climate, crop type, type and temporary storage of surface water, rainwater, and groundwater. amount of fertilizer applied, local cropping practices, presence These options include rainwater harvesting systems, managed of irrigation infrastructure, and institutional constraints can aquifer recharge, sand dams and subsurface dams, ponds, and affect the overall impact of AgBMPs on drought risk (The Nature infiltration ditches. These options are not considered purely Conservancy 2022). built/grey infrastructure, but rather include a natural component. The World Bank Group report What the Future Has in Store: A Most AgBMPs affect the hydrological cycle by enhancing New Paradigm for Water Storage (Burke et al. 2023) contains infiltration and percolation, thereby influencing the partitioning detailed definitions of natural and hybrid water storage options. between surface runoff and groundwater recharge. Depending on hydrogeological conditions, AgBMPs can promote Water storage solutions can effectively mitigate water shortages replenishment of aquifers, positively affecting baseflows and by carrying over water from wet periods, in some cases helping thus enhancing the availability of water in aquifers and rivers reduce evaporation, both in climates with strong wet and dry under dry conditions. In some cases, a counterbalancing effect seasonal patterns and during multi-month (or even multi-year) of increased annual evapotranspiration from cover crops can cyclical droughts (Burke et al. 2023). With increased frequency lead to an overall negative annual water yield (Qi, Helmers, and intensity of meteorological droughts expected as climate and Kaleita 2011), which should be taken into consideration change progresses (Reyer et al. 2015), natural and hybrid water when planning AgBMPs for drought risk management benefits. storage solutions are potentially effective climate adaptation measures that could reduce risks associated with hydrological VEGETATIVE WATER USE and agricultural droughts (for example, in irrigated systems). In the context of drought risk reduction, managing vegetative Although technical, financial, social, and environmental factors water use means addressing vegetation density, composition, differ from one to another storage option, they all “bank” water or productivity, typically through management and maintenance and build a buffer for drier periods. efforts, to enhance water availability. Examples: Storage solutions that combine the strengths of green ■ Silvicultural operations (such as thinning) in forested infrastructure and grey infrastructure are desirable when aiming environments. Thinning practices in forests involve the for solutions with relatively long residence times. selective removal of trees and shrubs to reduce stand density. Improving water availability is one of the main AGRICULTURAL BEST thinning objectives, along with enhancing forest health, MANAGEMENT PRACTICES promoting biodiversity, and reducing fire risk (Archer Agricultural best management practices (AgBMPs) are strategic et al. 2017). interventions in agricultural systems that are designed to reduce environmental impacts. AgBMPs can play a crucial role in ■ Removal of invasive species. This removal reduces preventing land degradation while, if properly applied, avoiding the water consumption of invasive species, which often production losses. Although often applied at the farm level, consume more water than native plants (Fuentes-Lillo AgBMPs can yield important benefits across a watershed. In the et al. 2023), thereby increasing water availability. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 71 APPENDIX B Other objectives include restoring biodiversity, SUSTAINABLE URBAN DRAINAGE SYSTEMS enhancing soil stability and nutrient cycling, and Sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS) aim to mimic containing the spread of invasive species to protect natural drainage in a developed area, where rainfall soaks into surrounding natural areas. the ground and saturates soil and vegetation before significant A careful balance between mechanical and manual methods runoff occurs. The systems thereby regulate the water cycle and, needs to be considered to achieve primary objectives while to a certain extent, enhance water availability in dry periods, at minimizing disruption of soil and undergrowth. Prescribed least locally. In addition, SUDS reduce heat stress and overall burning is sometimes applied in forest thinning or invasive vulnerability to drought. SUDS include green roofs, permeable species removal to eliminate undesired species and promote pavements, urban water harvesting, bioswales, green spaces the regeneration of native plants. (parks). They improve the quality of the water before it reaches the receiving water body. All techniques in this NbS category rest on one principle: the removal of vegetation with a relatively high water uptake, The World Bank flagship report A Catalogue of Nature-based thus reducing water consumption of the overall ecosystem Solutions for Urban Resilience (World Bank 2021a) explores (Brill et al. 2023). Thinning reduces the number of trees and the benefits of different SUDS. The SUDS with the strongest consequently decreases overall evapotranspiration. It allows linkages to drought regulation functions are “building solutions” more rainfall to infiltrate the soil, potentially recharging aquifers (green roofs/facades), “open green spaces,” and “retention and enhancing water availability during dry periods. Thinning ponds,” which, unlike other urban water storage solutions, are practices help maintain higher soil moisture levels, benefiting permanently filled. The World Bank report What the Future Has understory vegetation and making the forest ecosystem in Store (Burke et al. 2023) refers to these options. more resilient to drought. Removal of woody vegetation in Most SUDS are implemented to reduce urban flooding by grasslands leads to fewer woody plants competing for water, managing and retaining stormwater (Browder et al. 2019; thus increasing soil moisture levels and benefiting native Ozment et al. 2021). However, storage of excess water in grasses and other herbaceous plants. Trees and woody green roofs or retention ponds can reduce drought impacts by vegetation have access to water stored deep under the promoting reuse of water in dry periods (Eisenberg and Polcher surface, as demonstrated, for example, by pines in Patagonian 2020). Infiltration-enhancing measures, such as bioswales and grasslands (Gyenge, Fernández, and Schlichter 2003). permeable pavements, might augment groundwater recharge. With a lower water consumption, more precipitation reaches Water storage, water reuse, and groundwater recharge, as streams and rivers, increasing their flow and providing more well as the capture and slowing of runoff by constructed consistent water sources for ecosystems and human use. wetlands, are integrated in the “sponge city” concept. This By improving the health and diversity of the forest, thinning concept emerged from China and is increasingly applied in increases the forest’s capacity to withstand and recover from urban development strategies (Nguyen et al. 2019). Along with drought conditions. However, it is important to recognize that urban flood mitigation and water purification, the recycling of trees and woody plants contribute to biodiversity, provide stormwater for urban water supply during times of drought is habitat, and influence local climate conditions. Effective brush considered one of the main purposes of a sponge city. management focuses on ensuring that brush and woody In addition to potentially mitigating the hazard component vegetation are managed in a way that supports overall of drought risk, some urban NbS can enhance drought ecosystem health and resilience. Healthier trees and more resilience by reducing vulnerability through their cooling effect. robust ecosystems are better equipped to manage water stress. Converting to green roofs can reduce the surface temperatures Native plants are often better adapted to local climate of the roofs by 30°C to 60°C and ambient temperatures by up to conditions, including drought. By restoring native species, 5°C. In general, evaporation from stored water (for example, in forests and grasslands can more efficiently use available water ponds and basins) contributes to a cooling effect for most SUDS and withstand periods of low water availability. (Morales-Torres et al. 2016). 72 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY APPENDIX C Appendix C Key Questions Guiding DRRA Implementation T he following collection of questions can guide DRRA implementation. The questions are not exhaustive but do cover the most important considerations. They can help implementers tailor the DRRA to the specific country or regional context and to any specific needs and priorities. BLOCK I: SCOPING COORDINATION AND CAPACITY Block I focuses on the enabling environment and context in which the DRRA will be conducted. In this phase, opportunities, challenges, existing initiatives, and possible synergies are assessed. 1 Scoping coordination   How aware of drought and its cross-cutting nature is the country team? How strong is the culture of collaboration and knowledge sharing within the country team? within the  Do any cross-sectoral assessments integrate cross-cutting issues? implementing institution  What drought-relevant tools, studies, and projects have been or will be developed, implemented, or both? 2 Scoping coordination   Is the World Bank or are other partners best positioned to lead the DRRA? What is the relationship of the World Bank Group (WBG) to other donors and development between government, actors active in drought management in the given country? donors, development  Is it feasible and beneficial to engage in a platform for a multi-donor, partnership-based partners, and other stakeholders comprehensive DRRA?  Is funding from non-WBG initiatives available to additionally support the DRRA?  Have other partners developed drought risk assessments or drought resilience evaluation that can be built on?  Are there any ongoing or completed drought risk and resilience-relevant initiatives under the leadership of partners? 3 Scoping coordination  Is the country open to being informed about drought-related policy changes, strategic planning, or investment priorities? across government  What institutions and governmental entities are responsible for and involved in managing drought risk and developing drought resilience? How do they collaborate?  How aware of drought and its cross-cutting nature and impacts is the client government? Is drought management a priority?  What is the data-sharing practice of country stakeholders?  Would the creation of a data-driven, local, inter-sectoral coordination entity (e.g., national steering committee) for implementing the DRRA be desirable, feasible, and straightforward?  What is the general level of actors’ willingness and capacity to share relevant data? DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 73 APPENDIX C BLOCK II: ASSESSING DROUGHT RISK Block II comprises the drought risk assessment. The objective is to gather information on drought hazards, impacts, and vulnerabilities to develop a more comprehensive understanding of drought risk.  4 What institutions are in charge of monitoring drought?  Are there established mechanisms for knowledge sharing among hydrometeorological. agencies, Assessing current different sectors, and stakeholders? and recent drought hazards  Regarding drought monitoring, are there specific sectoral focuses, such as agricultural and water resources management?  How available are the measured raw data on precipitation, evapotranspiration, soil moisture, groundwater conditions, flows, and other parameters? At what scale are the data available?  What, if any, types of drought indices are compiled and at what spatial and temporal scales?  How well are historical drought events documented?  What, if any, additional expertise or collaboration is needed regarding drought monitoring and characterization?  5 Have recent studies or assessments focused on future drought and its connection to climate change?  What is the current state of knowledge regarding future drought trends and uncertainties in the Assessing main given country or region? trends of future drought hazards  To what extent are climate scenarios incorporated into existing (sectoral or spatial) drought risk assessments and planning processes?  6 Will this DRRA focus on a specific sector, or does it aim to be comprehensive?  What specific drought-related risks and impacts are of most concern? Assessing current  Does the country or region have a systematic impact database/monitoring system? If not, have and recent drought impacts any post-drought assessments examined impacts?  How far back do historical statistics go regarding agricultural and livestock production, forestry, river navigation, water supply, power generation, employment, industry outputs, and other parameters potentially impacted by drought?  Do water resources authorities monitor volumes abstracted, those serviced, and their economic performance? Are these data easily accessible?  Do water utilities monitor volumes abstracted, those serviced, and their economic performance? Are these data easily accessible?  How advanced are biodiversity accounting and ecosystem services accounting in the country or region?  7 Is there good-quality information on ecosystem characterization and land use characteristics?  Are SDGs tracked beyond the national level (i.e., on a more granular level)? Assessing country/  How far back do historical statistics go regarding population demographics, including age region vulnerability to drought distribution, gender indicators, income levels, education, and employment patterns?  Are data on access to basic services like water, sanitation, or health facilities easily accessible? At what scale?  Is the country/region monitoring water exploitation indices or similar indicators related to water balances? At what scale?  Are studies on institutional capacity at local administrative levels available?  Is information on poverty, vulnerabilities, and disaster impacts available at the household level? How often is it updated? 74 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY APPENDIX C BLOCK III: EVALUATING CURRENT RESILIENCE Block III focuses on the existing level of drought resilience. Current response and preparedness for droughts are assessed by reviewing the Menu of Measures (MoM) and the respective program areas, as informed by the EPIC Response framework. 8 Evaluating current   Do any reports, studies, or projects address specific program areas outlined in the MoM? For which program areas are there clear gaps or opportunities for improvement? drought response  Have any country/region priorities and needs in relation to specific program areas been identified? 9 Evaluating   Do any reports/exercises analyze the drought management status of the country/region? Do any reports, studies, or projects address specific program areas outlined in the MoM? current drought preparedness  For which program areas are there clear gaps or opportunities for improvement?  Have any country/region priorities and needs in relation to specific program areas been identified? BLOCK IV: PRIORITIZING AREAS FOR ACTION Block IV is the consolidation of all assessments to identify and prioritize potential measures to reduce drought risk and enhance drought resilience. The outcome is a list of prioritized potential measures, so it is crucial to first determine whether the country has already identified promising drought-related interventions and to determine the extent to which these measures have been assessed and discussed.  Has the country previously identified any promising drought-related interventions? If so, what are they? 10 Prioritizing  What is the current status of these identified measures? Have they been formally recognized as a priority or approved for implementation? measures to reduce drought risks and  To what extent have these measures been assessed? Are there existing evaluations or reports increase drought resilience comparing or detailing their effectiveness, feasibility, or impacts? How comprehensive are the assessments of these interventions? Do they cover cost, benefits, risks, and implementation challenges?  What stakeholder perspectives have been considered in the assessment of these measures?  Are there preferred methodologies or tools based on previous experience or expertise that stakeholders would recommend for analyzing the potential options (e.g., cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit)?  What are the primary criteria the government uses for evaluating potential measures (e.g., social impact, environmental benefits, long-term sustainability)? Should any criteria be weighted more heavily due to their importance or urgency?  What specific trade-offs should be considered in the evaluation of measures (e.g., are there potential conflicts between economic efficiency and social equity that need to be addressed)?  Are there particular benefits or drawbacks that are frequently overlooked but should be included in the analysis?  What level of detail is required for the DRRA findings to be actionable? At this stage, do stakeholders need a high-level overview to make preliminary decisions, or is a detailed quantitative analysis necessary for in-depth evaluation? DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 75 REFERENCES References Adler, M. D. 2019. Measuring Social Welfare: An Introduction. Browder, Greg, Suzanne Ozment, Irene Rehberger Bescos, USA: Oxford Univeristy Press. Todd Gartner, and Glenn-Marie Lange. 2019. Integrating Green and Gray: Creating Next Generation Infrastructure. Akyapi, Berkay, Matthieu Bellon, and Emanuele Massetti. Washington, DC: World Bank and World Resources 2022. Estimating Macro-Fiscal Effects of Climate Shocks Institute. from Billions of Geospatial Weather Observations. International Monetary Fund.­ Burke, Eileen, Jacqueline Marie Tront, Kimberly Nicole Lyon, William Rex, Melissa Ivy Castera Errea, Mili Chachyamma Alkadir, M. A., E. Pek, and M. Salman. 2022. A Multi-Criteria Varughese, Joshua Taylor Newton, Ayelen Nadia Becker, Assessment Framework for National Drought Planning. and Allison Louise Vale. 2023. What the Future Has in Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization. Store: A New Paradigm for Water Storage. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Antofie, T. E., B. Doherty, and M. Marin-Ferrer. 2018. Mapping of Risk Web-Platforms and Risk Data: Collection of Buurman, J., D. D. Bui, and L. T. T. Du. 2020. “Drought Risk Good Practices. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the Assessment in Vietnamese Communities Using Household European Union. Survey Information.” International Journal of Water Resources Development 36 (1): 88–105. Arena, C., M. Cannarozzo, A. Fortunato, I. Scolaro, and M. R. Mazzola. 2014. “Evaluating Infrastructure Alternatives for California Department of Water Resources. 2014. Handbook for Regional Water Supply Systems by Model-assisted Cost- Assessing Value of State Flood Management Investments. benefit Analysis–A Case Study from Apulia, Italy.” Procedia https://cawaterlibrary.net/document/handbook-for- Engineering 89: 1460–1469. assessing-value-of-state-flood-management-investments/. Ayantunde, A. A., M. D. Turner, and A. Kalilou. 2015. Cap-Net, GWP (Global Water Partnership), IDMP Integrated “Participatory Analysis of Vulnerability to Drought in Three Drought Management Programme), and WMO (world Agro-pastoral Communities in the West African Sahel.” Meterorological Organization). 2020. Drought Risk Pastoralism 5 (3). Reduction in Integrated Water Resources Management. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13570-015-0033-x. Cap-Net United Nations Development Program. Bahta, Yonas T., Andries Jordaan, and Boitumelo Phatudi- Carrão, Hugo, Gustavo Naumann, and Paulo Barbosa. 2016. Mphahlele. 2019. “Ecological Vulnerability Indicators to “Mapping Global Patterns of Drought Risk: An Empirical Drought: Case of Communal Farmers in Eastern Cape, Framework Based on Sub-national Estimates of Hazard, South Africa.” Jamba: Journal of Disaster Risk Studies 11 (1): Exposure and Vulnerability.” Global Environmental 591. Change–Human and Policy Dimensions 39: 108–124. Bonzanigo, Laura, Julie Rozenberg, Gregory Felter, Robert Christian, Jordan I., Elinor R. Martin, Jeffrey B. Basara, Jason Lempert, and Patrick Michael Reed. 2018. Building the C. Furtado, Jason A. Otkin, Lauren E. L. Lowman, Eric D. Resilience of WSS Utilities to Climate Change and Other Hunt, Vimal Mishra, and Xiangming Xiao. 2023. “Global Threats: A Road Map. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Projections of Flash Drought Show Increased Risk in a Warming Climate.” Communications Earth & Environment Bottero, Alessandra, Anthony W. D’Amato, Brian J. Palik, John 4: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-023-00826-1. B. Bradford, Shawn Fraver, Mike A. Battaglia, and Lance A. Asherin. 2017. “Density-Dependent Vulnerability of Forest Crossman, Neville D. 2018. Drought Resilience, Adaptation Ecosystems to Drought.” Journal of Applied Ecology 54 (6): and Management Policy (DRAMP) Framework. United 1605–1614. Nations Convention to Combat Desertification. Brill, Gregg, Deborah Carlin, Cora Snyder, Hannah Baleta, Kari Damania, Richard, Sébastien Desbureaux, Marie Hyland, Asif Vigerstol, Naabia Ofosu-Amaah, Michael Matosisch et al. Islam, Scott Moore, Aude-Sophie Rodella, Jason Russ, and 2023. Benefit Accounting of Nature-Based Solutions for Esha Zaveri. 2017. Uncharted Waters: The New Economics Watersheds: Guide V2. Oakland, California: United Nations of Water Scarcity and Variability. Washington, DC: World CEO Water Mandate and Pacific Institute. Bank Group. Browder, Greg, Ana Nunez Sanchez, Brendan Jongman, De Mesentier Silva, F., A. Isaksen, J. Togelius, and A. Nealen. Nathan Engle, Eelco Van Beek, Melissa Castera Errera, and 2016. “Generating Heuristics for Novice Players.” In Stephen Hodgson. 2021. An EPIC Response: Innovative 2016 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence Governance for Flood and Drought Risk Management. and Games (CIG). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Washington, DC: World Bank. Engineer. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIG.2016.7860407. 76 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY REFERENCES De Nys, Erwin, Nathan L. Engle, and Antônio Rocha Magalhães. EU (European Union), UNDP (United Nations Development 2017. Drought in Brazil: Proactive Management and Policy. Programme), and WBG (World Bank Group). 2013. Drought and Water Crises. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Guidelines for Assessing the Human Impact of Disasters. https://www.undp.org/publications/guidelines-assessing- Deltares. 2017. Global Inventory of Drought Hazard and human-impact-disasters. Risk Modeling Tools and Resources. Deltares. https:// publications.deltares.nl/11200758_002_0001.pdf. FAO. 2012. Coping with Water Scarcity: An Action Framework for Agriculture and Food Security. Rome: Food and Deltares. 2018. Comparative Assessment of Drought Hazard Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. and Risk Modeling Tools. Deltares. https://www.deltares. nl/en/expertise/publicaties/comparative-assessment-of- FAO. 2017. Tracking Adaptation in Agricultural Sectors: drought-hazard-and-risk-modeling-tools. Climate Change Adaptation Indicators. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Deltares. 2022. “Policy Brief: Nature-based Solutions to https://www.fao.org/3/I8145EN/i8145en.pdf. Mitigate Impacts of Droughts.” Deltares. https://atuk.com. ec/documentos/deltares-2022-policy-brief-based-solutions- FAO. 2024. “Drought Portal--Knowledge Resources on and-droughts.pdf. Integrated Drought Management.” Accessed July 21, 2024. https://www.fao.org/in-action/drought-portal/preparedness/ Deltares. 2023. “EPIC Response framework.mov.” vulnerability-and-impact-assessment/vulnerability-impact- https://vimeo.com/820423508/9637b9ca5e?share=copy. assessment-compendium-chapter-1/en. DHI (Drought Hazard Index). 2023. “Flood and Drought Portal.” Farahani, H., and Mehri Jahansoozi. 2022. “Analysis of Rural Accessed June 11, 2023. https://www.flooddroughtmonitor. Households’ Resilience to Drought in Iran, Case Study: com/home?u=DEMO&p=DEMO. Bajestan County.” International Journal of Disaster Risk Ding, Y., M. J. Hayes, and M. Widhalm. 2011. “Measuring Reduction 82: 103331. Economic Impacts of Drought: A Review and Discussion.” Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Fennell, Jessica, Chris Soulsby, Mark E. Wilkinson, Ronald Journal 20 (4): 434–446. Daalmans, and Josie Geris. 2023. “Time Variable Effectiveness and Cost-Benefits of Different Nature- EC (European Commission). 2023. Stock-taking Analysis and based Solution Types and Design for Drought and Flood Outlook of Drought Policies, Planning and Management in Management.” Nature-Based Solutions 3: 100050. EU Member States. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Filoso, Solange, Maíra Ometto Bezerra, Katherine C. B. Weiss, and Margaret A. Palmer. 2017. “Impacts of Forest EC, GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Restoration on Water Yield: A Systematic Review.” PLOS Recovery), and UN (United Nations). 2018. Post Disaster ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183210. Needs Assessment (PDNA): Lessons from a Decade of Experience. https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/ Freire-González, Jaume, Christopher Decker, and Jim W. Hall. publication/Final_PDNA_Evaluation_Report.pdf. 2017. “The Economic Impacts of Droughts: A Framework for Analysis.” Ecological Economics 132: 196–204. EC, UNDG (United Nations Development Group), and World Bank. 2013. Post-Disaster Needs Assessments: Volume Fuentes-Lillo, Eduardo, Jonas J. Lembrechts, Agustina Barros, A Guidlines. https://www.gfdrr.org/en/publication/post- Valeria Aschero, Ramiro O. Bustamante, Lohengrin A. disaster-needs-assessments-guidelines-volume-2013. Cavieres, Jan Clavel, et al. 2023. “Going Up the Andes: Patterns and Drivers of Non-native Plant Invasions Across Eckhardt, Daniel, Adriana Leiras, and Antônio Márcio Latitudinal and Elevational Gradients.” Biodiversity and Tavares Thomé. 2018. “Systematic Literature Review of Conservation 32: 4199–4219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531- Methodologies for Assessing the Costs of Disasters.” 023-02697-6. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction 33: 398–416. GFDRR (Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery). 2010a. Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment. Eisenberg, B., and V. Polcher. 2020. “Nature Based Guidance Notes: Volume 1. Design and Execution of a Solutions–Technical Handbook.” https://unalab.eu/system/ Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment. Washington, DC: files/2020-02/unalab-technical-handbook-nature-based- The World Bank. solutions2020-02-17.pdf. GFDRR. 2010b. Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment. Guidance El-Khattabi, Ahmed Rachid, Shadi Eskaf, Julien P. Isnard, Notes: Volume 2. Conducting Damage and Loss Assessments Laurence Lin, Brian McManus, and Andrew J. Yates. 2021. After Disasters. Washington, DC: The World Bank. “Heterogeneous Responses to Price: Evidence from Residential Water Consumers.” Journal of Environmental GFDRR. 2010c. Damage, Loss and Needs Assessment Guidance Economics and Management 107: 102430. Notes: Volume 3. Estimation of Post-Disaster Needs for Recovery https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2021.102430. and Reconstruction. Washington, DC: The World Bank. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 77 REFERENCES Ghazi, Babak, Sanjana Dutt, and Ali Torabi Haghighi. 2023. IPCC. 2023. “Annex I: Glossary” [Reisinger, A., D. Cammarano, “Projection of Future Meteorological Droughts in Lake A. Fischlin, J.S. Fuglestvedt, G. Hansen, Y. Jung, C. Ludden, Urmia Basin, Iran.” Water 15 (8): 1–16. V. Masson-Delmotte, R. Matthews, J.B.K Mintenbeck, D.J. Orendain, A. Pirani, E. Poloczanska, and J. Romero (eds.)]. Ghimire, Yuga Nath, Ganesh Prasad Shivakoti, and Sylvain In Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Roger Perret. 2010. “Household-level Vulnerability to Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report Drought in Hill Agriculture of Nepal: Implications for of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Adaptation Planning.” International Journal of Sustainable Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Development & World Ecology 17 (3): 225–230. Switzerland, pp. 119–130. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/ syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_AnnexesIndex.pdf. Green Nylen, Nell, Michael Kiparsky, Dave Owen, Holly Doremus, and Michael Hanemann. 2018. Addressing Kalra, Nidhi, David G. Groves, Laura Bonzanigo, Edmundo Institutional Vulnerabilities in California’s Drought Water Molina Perez, Cayo Ramos, Carter Brandon, and Iván Allocation. Part 1: Water Rights Administration and Rodriguez Cabanillas. 2015. Robust Decision-Making Oversight During Major Statewide Droughts, 1976–2016. in the Water Sector: A Strategy for Implementing Lima’s California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. California Long-Term Water Resources Master Plan. Policy Research Natural Resources Agency. Working Paper, Washington, DC: The World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-7439. Guimarães Nobre, Gabriela, Frank Davenport, Konstantinos Bischiniotis, Ted Veldkamp, Brenden Jongman, Kang, Hyunwoo, Venkataramana Sridhar, Bradford F. Mills, W. Christopher C. Funk, Gregory Husak, Philip J. Ward, and Cully Hession, and Jactone A. Ogejo. 2019. “Economy-wide Jeroen Aerts. 2019. “Financing Agricultural Drought Risk Climate Change Impacts on Green Water Droughts Based Through Ex-ante Cash Transfers.” Science of The Total on the Hydrologic Simulations.” Agricultural Systems 171: Environment 653: 523–535. 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-7439. Gunasekera, Rashmin, James Daniell, Antonios Pomonis, Karavitis, C. A., D. E. Tsesmelis, N. A. Skondras, D. Stamatakos, Rodrigo Andres Donoso Arias, Oscar Ishizawa, and S. Alexandris, V. Fassouli, C. G. Vasilakou, P. D. Oikonomou, Harriette Stone. 2018. Methodology Note on the Global G. Gregorič, N. S. Grigg, and E. C. Vlachos. 2014. “Linking RApid Post-disaster Damage Estimation (GRADE) Drought Characteristics to Impacts on a Spatial and Approach. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Temporal Scale.” Water Policy 16 (6): 1172–97. https://doi. org/10.2166/wp.2014.205. Gyenge, Javier E. , M. Elena Fernández, and Tomás M. Schlichter. 2003. “Water Relations of Ponderosa Pines Karimi, P., S. Pareeth, and C. Michailovsky. 2019. Rapid in Patagonia Argentina: Implications for Local Water Assessment of the Water Accounts in Urmia Lake Basin. Resources and Individual Growth.” Trees 17: 417–423. Project report. IHE Delft, The Netherlands.. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00468-003-0254-2. Kern, Jordan D., Yufei Su, and Joy Hill. 2020. “A Retrospective Hoque, Muhammad Al-Amin, Biswajeet Pradhan, Naser Study of the 2012–2016 California Drought and Its Impacts Ahmed, and Abdullah Alamri. 2021. “Drought Vulnerability on the Power Sector.” Environmental Research Letters 15 Assessment Using Geospatial Techniques in Southern 094008. Queensland, Australia.” Sensors 21 (20): 6896. Keys, P. W., R. J. van der Ent, L. J. Gordon, H. Hoff, R. Nikoli, and Howard, A., L. Biettio, M. Hayes, A. Kleschenko, K. Quevedo, and H. H. G. Savenije. 2012. “Analyzing Precipitationsheds to A. Susnik. 2021. “Commission for Agricultural Meteorology Understand the Vulnerability of Rainfall Depedent Regions.” (CAgM): Expert Team 3.1—Report on Drought (2014–2018).” Biogeosciences 9: 733–746. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess- World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 18-3937-2014. Ilstedt, U., A. Bargués Tobella, H. R. Bazié, J. Bayala, E. Keys, P. W., E. A. Barnes, R. J. van der Ent, and L. J. Verbeeten, G. Nyberg, J. Sanou, et al. 2016. “Intermediate Gordon. 2014. “Variability of Moisture Recycling Using Tree Cover Can Maximize Groundwater Recharge in the a Precipitationshed Framework.” Hydrology and Earth Seasonally Dry Tropics.” Scientific Reports 6: 21930. https:// System Sciences 18 (10): 3937–3950. doi.org/10.1038/srep21930. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-3937-2014. IPCC. 2021. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Khan, Nasir Abbas, Qijie Gao, and Muhammad Abid. 2020. Basis. Contribution of Working Group l to the Sixth “Public Institutions’ Capacities Regarding Climate Change Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel Adaptation and Risk Management Support in Agriculture: on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom The Case of Punjab Province, Pakistan.” Scientific Reports and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. 10 (1): 14111. doi:10.1017/9781009157896. Khoi, Dao Nguyen, Truong Thao Sam, Pham Thi Loi, Bui Viet IPCC. 2022. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation Hung, and Van Thinh Nguyen. 2021. “Impact of Climate and Vulnerability. Cambridge, UK, and New York, NY, USA: Change on Hydro-meteorological Drought Over the Be Cambridge University Press. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/. River Basin, Vietnam.” Journal of Water and Climate 78 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY REFERENCES Change 12 (7): 3159–3169. mapa?mes=6&ano=2024. King-Okumu, Caroline. 2019. Drought Impact and Vulnerability Morales-Torres, Adrián, Ignacio Escuder-Bueno, Ignacio Assessment: A Rapid Review of Practices and Policy Andrés-Doménech, and Sara Perales-Momparler. 2016. Recommendations. Bonn: UNCCD. “Decision Support Tool for Energy-efficient, Sustainable and Integrated Urban Stormwater Management.” Kumar, Prashant, Sisay E. Debele, Jeetendra Sahani, Nidhi Environmental Modelling & Software 84: 518–528. https:// Rawat, Belen Marti-Cardona, Silvia Maria Alfieri, Bidroha doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2016.07.019. Basu, et al. 2021. “Nature-based Solutions Efficiency Evaluation Against Natural Hazards: Modelling Methods, Nakicenovic, Nebojsa, Joseph Alcamo, Gerald Davis, Bert Advantages and Limitations.” Science of The Total de Vries, Joergen Fenhann, Stuart Gaffin, Kenneth Environment 784: 147058. Gregory et al. 2000. Special Report on Emissions Scenarios. A Special Report of Working Group III of Li, Xinqing, Lixiao Zhang, Yan Hao, Pengpeng Zhang, Xin the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Xiong, and Zhimin Shi. 2022. “System Dynamics Modeling Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. of Food-Energy-Water Resource Security in a Megacity of China: Insights from the Case of Beijing.” Journal of National Drought Mitigation Center. 2018. SPI Generator Cleaner Production 355: 131773. [software]. University of Nebraska–Lincoln. https://drought. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131773. unl.edu/Monitoring/SPI/SPIProgram.aspx. Limones, Natalia, Javier Marzo-Artigas, Marcus Wijnen, and National Drought Mitigation Center, Oklahoma Climatology Aleix Serrat-Capdevila. 2020. “Evaluating Drought Risk Survey, Lower Platte River Coridor Alliance, Univeristy in Data-Scarce Contexts: The Case of Southern Angola.” of Oklahoma, NIDIS, and NOAA. 2011. Drought- Journal of Water and Climate Change 11 (S1): 44–67. Ready Communities. A Guide to Community Drought Preparedness. Lincoln: National Drought Mitigation Center. Limones, N., M. Wijnen, and A. Serrat-Capdevila. 2024. https://drought.unl.edu/Planning/PlanningProcesses/ “Siting Sand Dams for Enhancing Water Security and Drought-ReadyCommunities.aspx. Drought Resilience in Rural Areas: A Stepwise Approach.” Manuscript in preparation. Washington, DC: World Bank. Naumann, G., P. Barbosa, L. Garrote, A. Iglesias, and J. Vogt. 2014. “Exploring Drought Vulnerability in Africa: An Liu, Tiedong, Kai Jiang, Zhaoyuan Tan, Qifang He, Hui Indicator Based Analysis to Be Used in Early Warning Zhang, and Chen Wang. 2021. “A Method for Performing Systems.” Hydrology and Earth System Science 18 (5): Reforestation to Effectively Recover Soil Water Content in 1591–1604. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-18-1591-2014. Extremely Degraded Tropical Rain Forests.” Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 9: 643994. Nguyen, Thu Thuy, Huu Hao Ngo, Wenshan Guo, Xiaochang C. Wang, Nanqi Ren, Guibai Li, Jie Ding, and Heng Lückerath, Daniel, Erich Rome, and Katharina Milde. 2023. Liang. 2019. “Implementation of a Specific Urban Water “Using Impact Chains for Assessing Local Climate Risk—A Management: Sponge City.” Science of The Total Case Study on Impacts of Extended Periods of Fluvial Low Environment 652: 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Waters and Drought on a Metropolitan Region.” Frontiers in scitotenv.2018.10.168. Climate 5: 1–20. Noleppa, Steffen, and Agripol – Network for Policy Advice Mdemu, M.V. 2021. “Community’s Vulnerability to Drought- GbR. 2013. Economic Approaches for Assessing Climate Driven Water Scarcity and Food Insecurity in Central Change Adaptation Options Under Uncertainty: Excel and Northern Semi-arid Areas of Tanzania.” Frontiers in Tools for Cost-Benefit and Multi-Criteria Analysis. Eschborn: Climate 3. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/climate/ articles/10.3389/fclim.2021.737655/full. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. https://www.adaptationcommunity.net/ Meza, Isabel, Michael Hagenlocher, Gustavo Naumann, download/ms/mainstreaming-guides-manuals-reports/ Juergen Vogt, and Janna Frischen. 2018. Drought Economic_assessment_of_CC_adaptation_options_-_ Vulnerability Indicators for Global-scale Drought Risk GIZ_2013.pdf. Assessments. EUR 29824 EN. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). 2010. Guidance on Sustainability Impact MoFE (Ministry of Forestry and Environment). 2020. Capacity Assessment. OECD. Gap Assessment Report of the Thematic/Cross-cutting Working Groups. Building Capacity to Advance Adaptation Otkin, Jason A., Mark Svoboda, Eric D. Hunt, Trent W. Ford, Plan Process in Nepal. NAP Nepal Technical Paper Martha C. Anderson, Christopher Hain, and Jeffrey B. Basara. 16/2020. Kathmandu: Government of Nepal. 2018. “Flash Droughts: A Review and Assessment of the Challenges Imposed by Rapid-Onset Droughts in the United Monitor de Secas. 2024. “Monitor de Secas.” Accessed States.” Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 99 August 5, 2024. https://monitordesecas.ana.gov.br/ (5): 911–919. https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-17-0149.1. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 79 REFERENCES Ozment, Suzanne, Maggie Gonzalez, Anelise Schumacher, Avanzi, G. Naumann, and P. Barbosa. 2023. European Emmie Oliver, Ana Gabriela Morales, Todd Gartner, Drought Risk Atlas. Publications Office of the European Mariana Silva Zuniga, Gregory Watson, and Alfred Union, Luxembourg. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ Grünwaldt. 2021. Nature-Based Solutions in Latin America repository/handle/JRC135215. and The Caribbean: Regional Status and Priorities for Growth. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute. Rouillard, J., J. Tröltzsch, J. Tarpey, M. Lago, P. Watkiss, A. Hunt, F. Bosello, et al. 2016. The Economic Analysis Pan, Renan, Alexandra da Silva Martinez, Tauane Santos of Climate Adaptation: Insights for Policy-makers. Brito, and Edleusa Pereira Seidel. 2018. “Processes of Soil Deliverable 10.3, ECONADAPT. https://climate-adapt. Infiltration and Water Retention and Strategies to Increase eea.europa.eu/en/metadata/publications/the-economic- Their Capacity.” Journal of Experimental Agriculture analysis-of-climate-adaptation-insights-for-policy-makers. International 20 (2): 1–14. https://journaljeai.com/index.php/ JEAI/article/view/197. Ruangpan, Laddaporn, Zoran Vojinovic, Jasna Plavšić, Dong-Jiing Doong, Tobias Bahlmann, Alida Alves, Leng- Parker, Tess, and Ailie Gallant. 2021. “‘Flash Droughts’ Can Hsuan Tseng, et al. 2021. “Incorporating Stakeholders’ Dry Out Soil in Weeks. New Research Shows What They Preferences into a Multi-criteria Framework for Planning Look Like in Australia.” The Conversation. June 3, 2021. Large-scale Nature-Based Solutions.” Ambio 50 (8): https://theconversation.com/flash-droughts-can-dry-out- 1514–1531. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13280- soil-in-weeks-new-research-shows-what-they-look-like-in- 020-01419-4. australia-161286. Salvador, Coral, Raquel Nieto, Sergio M. Vicente-Serrano, Pedro-Monzonís, María, Abel Solera, Javier Ferrer, Joaquín Ricardo García-Herrera, Luis Gimeno, and Ana M. Vicedo- Andreu, and Teodoro Estrela. 2016. “Water Accounting Cabrera. 2023. “Public Health Implications of Drought in a for Stressed River Basins Based on Water Resources Climate Change Context: A Critical Review.” Annual Review Management Models.” Science of The Total Environment of Public Health 44: 213–232. https://doi.org/10.1146/ 565: 181–190. annurev-publhealth-071421-051636. PROVIA. 2013. PROVIA Guidance on Assessing Vulnerability, Santos de Lima, Letícia, Francisco Eustáquio Oliveira e Impacts and Adaptation to Climate Change. Consultation Silva, Paula Rosana Dorio Anastácio, Marina Marcela document. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme. de Paula Kolanski, Ana Carolina Pires Pereira, Marianne Stéfany Resende Menezes, Evandro Landulfo Teixeira Qi, Zhiming, Matthew J. Helmers, and Amy L. Kaleita. 2011. “Soil Paradela Cunha, and Marcia Nunes Macedo. 2024. Water Dynamics Under Various Agricultural Land Covers “Severe Droughts Reduce River Navigability and Isolate on a Subsurface Drained Field in North-Central Iowa, USA.” Communities in the Brazilian Amazon.” Communications Agricultural Water Management 98 (4): 665–674. https:// Earth & Environment 5: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/ doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2010.11.004. s43247-024-01530-4. Reyer, Christopher P.O., Sophie Adams, Torsten Albrecht, Scognamillo, A., M. Mastrorillo, and A. Ignaciuk. 2022. Florent Baarsch, Alice Boit, Nella Canales Trujillo, Matti Reducing Vulnerability to Weather Shocks Through Cartsburg, et al. 2015. “Climate Change Impacts in Latin Social Protection–Evidence from the Implementation of America and the Caribbean and Their Implications for Productive Safety Net Programme (PSNP) in Ethiopia. Development.” Regional Environmental Change 17: FAO Agricultural Development Economics Working Paper 1601–1621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-015-0854-6. 22–02, Rome: FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc0824en. Richts, Andrea, and Jaroslav Vrba. 2016. “Groundwater Resources and Hydroclimatic Extremes: Mapping Global Serrat-Capdevila, Aleix, Natalia Limones, Javier Marzo- Groundwater Vulnerability to Floods and Droughts.” Artigas, Marcus Wijnen, and Bruno Petrucci. 2022. Water Environmental Earth Sciences 75 (926). Security and Drought Resilience in the South of Angola. Washington, DC: World Bank. Rockström, Johan, Mariana Mazzucato, Lauren Seaby Andersen, Simon Felix Fahrländer, and Dieter Gerten. Serrat-Capdevila, A., N. Limones, and M. Wijnen. 2023. 2023. “Why We Need a New Economics of Water as a Making Drought Resilience and Water Security in the Common Good.” Nature 615 (7954): 794–797. South of Angola Happen: Synthesis Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. Rodella, Aude-Sophie, Esha Zaveri, and Francois Bertone. 2023. The Hidden Wealth of Nations: The Economics of Simelton, Elisabeth, Evan D.G. Fraser, Mette Termansen, Piers Groundwater in Times of Climate Change. Washington, DC: M. Forster, and Andrew J. Dougill. 2009. “Typologies of World Bank. Crop-Drought Vulnerability: An Empirical Analysis of the Socio-economic Factors That Influence the Sensitivity Rossi, L., M. Wens, H. De Moel, D. Cotti, A.-S. Sabino Siemons, and Resilience to Drought of Three Major Food Crops in A. Toreti, W. Maetens, D. Masante, A. Van Loon, M. China (1961–2001).” Environmental Science & Policy 12 (4): Hagenlocher, R. Rudari, M. Meroni, M. Isabellon, F. 438–452. 80 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY REFERENCES Smirnov, Oleg, Minghua Zhang, Tingyin Xiao, John Orbell, ical Component].” CIHEAM / EC MEDA Water (58): 85–102. Amy Lobben, and Josef Gordon. 2016. “The Relative https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1&- Importance of Climate Change and Population Growth for type=pdf&doi=3ef541cc18cec3e3492f82f96d9e76e- Exposure to Future Extreme Droughts.” Climatic Change a4674ab43. 138: 41–53. Tsesmelis, D.E., C.A. Karavitis, P.D. Oikonomou, S. Alexandris, Staupe-Delgado, Reidar. 2019. Overcoming Barriers to and C. Kosmas. 2019. “Assessment of the Vulnerability to Proactive Response in Slow-Onset Disasters. Contributing Drought and Desertification Characteristics Using the Paper to GAR 2019, United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Standardized Drought Vulnerability Index (SDVI) and the Reduction. Environmentally Sensitive Areas Index (ESAI).” Resources 8 (1): 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources8010006. Steinemann, Anne, Sam F. Iacobellis, and Daniel R. Cayan. 2015. “Developing and Evaluating Drought Indicators for UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) and EC Decision-Making.” Journal of Hydrometeorology 16 (4): (European Commission). 2016. Community Based Resilience 1793–1803. Analysis (CoBRA). Conceptual Framework and Methodology. UNDP Drylands Development Centre. https://www.undp.org/ Sultana, Rumana, Haseeb Md. Irfanullah, Samiya A. Selim, publications/cobra-conceptual-framework. and Mohammad Budrudzaman. 2023. “Vulnerability and Ecosystem-based Adaption in the Farming Communities UNCCD. 2022a. Droughts in Numbers 2022: Restoration for of Drought-Prone Northwest Bangladesh.” Environmental Readiness and Resilience. Côte d’Ivoire: UNCCD. Challenges 11: 100707. UNCCD. 2022b. FACTSHEET: Drought and Its Socio-economic Sušnik, Janez, Lydia S. Vamvakeridou-Lyroudia, Dragan A. Impacts. Bonn: UNCCD. Savić, and Zoran Kapelan. 2012. “Integrated System Dynamics Modelling for Water Scarcity Assessment: UNCCD. 2022c. Stocktaking of Existing Drought and Related Case Study of the Kairouan Region.” Science of The Total Policies. Bonn: UNCCD. https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/ Environment 440: 290–306. files/2022-02/stocktaking%20policies%20final-final.pdf. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.05.085. UN-ISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Tenagashaw, Diress Yigezu. 2022. “Analysis and Reduction ) and SIDA (Swedish International Development Characterization of Hydrological Drought Under Future Cooperation Agency). 2008. Review and Analysis of Climate Change Using the SWAT Model in Tana Sub-basin, Existing Drought Risk Reduction Policies and Programs in Ethiopia.” Water Conservation Science and Engineering 7: Uganda. National Report on Drought Risk Reduction 131–142. Policies and Programmes, The Republic of Uganda. https://www.preventionweb.net/files/8160_Ugan- The Nature Conservancy. 2022. “Financing Nature for daDroughtRiskReductionPolicyAnalyticalReport.pdf. Water Security: A How-To Guide to Develop Watershed Investment Programs--Annex B: Factsheets.” Urquijo-Reguera, Julia, Maria Teresa Gomez-Villarino, David Pereira, and Lucia De Stefano. 2020. “An Assessment The Nature Conservancy. 2023. “The Invisible Reservoir Framework to Analyze Drought Management Plans: Biophysical and Economic Study on Investments in Nature- The Case of Spain.” Agronomy 12 (4): 70. Based Solutions for Water Security and Climate Adaptation https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12040970. in the Cantareira System, São Paulo, Brazil.” USAID. 2018. Economics of Resilience to Drought: Executive The Nature Conservancy and Agence Francaise Summary. USAID. https://2017-2020.usaid.gov/docu- de Developpement. N.D. “Wetland Restoration: ments/1867/economics-resilience-drought-execu- Intervention Category: Restoration.” TNC. https:// tive-summary. resilientwatershedstoolbox.org/sites/default/files/ documents/library/NbS%20Factsheet%20Wetland%20 USAID. 2022. USAID Climate Resilience and Disaster Recov- Restoration.pdf. ery Capacity Assessment for the Caribbean Region. Gaps and Opportunities Assessment Report, Washington, DC: Tröltzsch, J., J. Rouillard, J. Tarpey, Lago M., P. Watkiss, and A. USAID. https://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PA00Z9P8.pdf. Hunt. 2016. The Economics of Climate Change Adaptation: Insights into Economic Assessment Methods. Deliverable Vallejo, Lola, and Michael Mullan. 2017. Climate-Resilient 10.2, ECONADAPT. https://econadapt.eu/sites/default/files/ Infrastructure: Getting the Policies Right. Environment docs/Deliverable%2010-2.pdf. Working Paper 121. Organisation for Economic Co-opera- tion and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/ Tsakiris, G., A. Loukas, D. Pangalou, H. Vangelis, D. Tigkas, G. docserver/02f74d61-en.pdf?expires=1724199972&id=id&ac Rossi, and A. Cancelliere. 2007. “Drought Characterization cname=guest&checksum=BD8EE24222482105F- [Part 1. Components of Drought Planning. 1.3. Methodolog- 6F12834EAFA7EE6. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 81 REFERENCES Van Zanten, Boris Ton, Gonzalo Gutierrez Giozueta, Luke al Effects of Resilience-enhancing Strategies in a Mckinnon Brander, Borja Gonzalez Reguero, Robert Griffin, Smallholder Agricultural System.” Agricultural Systems Kavita Kapur Macleod, Alida Ivana Alves Beloqui, Amelia 182: 102832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2020.102832. Midgley, Luis Diego Herrera Garcia, and Brenden Jong- man. 2023. Assessing the Benefits and Costs of Na- WMO (World Meteorological Organization). 1992. “International ture-Based Solutions for Climate Resilience: A Guideline Meteorological Vocabulary.” WMO No. 182. Geneva, WMO. for Project Developers. Washington, DC: World Bank. WMO. 2021. WMO Atlas of Mortality and Economic Losses Venton, Paul Adrian, Courtenay Cabot Venton, Natalia from Weather, Climate and Water Extremes (1970–2019). Limones, Christopher Ward, Frederik Pischke, Nathan Geneva: World Meteorological Organization. Engle, Marcus Wijnen, and Amal Talbi. 2019. Framework for the Assessment of Benefits of Action or Cost of WMO and GWP (Global Water Partnership). 2016. Handbook Inaction (BACI) for Drought Preparedness (English). of Drought Indicators and Indices. Geneva: Integrated Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Drought Management Programme. Vermeulen, Sam, Jan Cools, Jan Staes, and Steven Van Wilhite, Donald A., WMO, GWP, and National Drought Mitiga- Passel. 2023. “A Review of Economic Assessments of tion Center. 2014. National Drought Management Policy Drought Risk Reduction Approaches in Agriculture.” Guidelines: A Template for Action. Integrated Drought Journal of Environmental Management 345: 118909. Management Programme (IDMP) Tools and Guidelines Series 1, Geneva, Switzerland, and Stockholm, Sweden: Vicente-Serrano, Sergio M., Dhais Peña-Angulo, Santiago WMO and GWP. Beguería, Fernando Domínguez-Castro, Miquel Tomás-Burguera, Iván Noguera, Luis Gimeno-Sotelo, and World Bank. 2005. Ethiopia: Risk and Vulnerability Assess- Ahmed El Kenawy. 2022. “Global Drought Trends and ment. Report No. 26275-ET, Washington, DC: World Bank. Future Projections.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. 380 (2238): 20210285. World Bank. 2010. Economics of Adaptation to Climate Change: Synthesis Report. Washington, DC: World Bank. Vigerstol, Kari, Nathan Karres, Shiteng Kang, Nancy Lilly, and Marika Massey-Bierman. 2023. Accelerating Adaptation: World Bank. 2019. Assessing Drought Hazard and Risk: The Promise and Limitations of Nature-based Solutions Principles and Implementation Guidance. Washington, DC: in the Race to Adapt to Increasing Floods and Droughts. World Bank. Arlington, Virginia, USA: The Nature Conservancy. World Bank. 2020. Resilient Water Infrastructure Design Brief. Vogt, Juergen V., Gustavo Naumann, Dario Masante, Washington, DC: World Bank. Jonathan Spinoni, Carmelo Cammalleri, Wadid Erian, Frederik Pischke, Roger Pulwarty, and Paulo Barbosa. World Bank. 2021a. A Catalogue of Nature-based Solutions 2018. Drought Risk Assessment and Management. A for Urban Resilience. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Conceptual Framework. JRC Technical Reports, Luxem- World Bank. 2021b. “Water Security Diagnostic Initiative.” bourg: Publications Office of the European Union. Accessed July, 18, 2024. https://www.worldbank.org/en/ Wang-Erlandsson, Lan, Ingo Fetzer, Patrick W. Keys, Ruud J. topic/water/publication/water-security-diagnostic-initia- van der Ent, Hubert H. G. Savenije, and Line J. Gordon. tive#2. 2018. “Remote Land Use Impacts on River Flows Through Atmospheric Teleconnections.” Hydrology and Earth World Bank Group. 2022. Angola Country Climate and System Sciences 22 (8): 4311–4328. https://doi. Development Report. CCDR Series, Washington, DC: org/10.5194/hess-22-4311-2018. World Bank. Ward, Frank A., Saud A. Amer, Dina A. Salman, Wayne R. World Bank Group. 2023. The Development, Climate, and Belcher, Ahmed Abdulhamza Khamees, Hatem Salloom Nature Crisis: Solutions to End Poverty on a Livable Saleh, Aysar Abdul Azeez Saeed, and Hamdiea Skheel Planet--Insights from World Bank Country Climate and Jazaa. 2022. “Economic Optimization to Guide Climate Development Reports Covering 42 Economies. Washing- Water Stress Adaptation.” Journal of Environmental ton, D.C.: World Bank. Management 301: 113884. World Bank and California Water Authority. 2023. “Guidelines Wilhite, Donald A. 2012. “Breaking the Hydro-Illogical Cycle: for Drought Risk Management - Economic Methods, Changing the Paradigm for Drought Management.” EARTH Models and Tools.” Manuscript in preparation. World Bank, Magazine 57 (7): 71–72. Washington, DC. Williams, T.G., S.D. Guikema, D.G. Brown, and A. Agrawal. World Bank. 2024. “Romania Drought Risk Assessment.” 2020. “Resilience and Equity: Quantifying the Distribution- Manuscript in preparation. World Bank, Washington, DC. 82 DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY REFERENCES World Bank and GFDRR. 2015. Analyzing the Social Impacts of Disaster. Volume I: Methodology. Washington, DC: World Bank. Wu, Guiyang, Jie Chen, Xinyan Shi, Jong-Suk Kim, Jun Xia, and Liping Zhang. 2022. “Impacts of Global Climate Warming on Meteorological and Hydrological Droughts andTheir Propagations.” Earth’s Future 10 (3). Xu, Lianlian, Tuantuan Zhang, Wei Yu, and Song Yang. 2023. “Changes in Concurrent Precipitation and Temperature Extremes Over the Asian Monsoon Region: Observation and Projection.” Environmental Research Letters 18: 044021. Yuan, Xing, Yumiao Wang, Peng Ji, Peili Wu, Justin Sheffield, and Jason A. Otkin. 2023. “A Global Transition to Flash Droughts Under Climate Change.” Science 380: 187–191. Zaveri, Esha, Richard Damania, and Nathan Engle. 2023. Droughts and Deficits: The Impact of Water Scarcity on Economic Growth. Policy Research Working Paper, Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Zeng, Jianxing, Jiaxian Li, Xingjie Lu, Zhongwang Wei, Wei Shangguan, Shupeng Zhang, Yongjiu Dai, and Shulei Zhang. 2022. “Assessment of Global Meteorological, Hydrological and Agricultural Drought Under Future Warming Based on CMIP6.” Atmospheric and Oceanic Science Letters 15 (1): 100143. Zhang, Fan, and Christian Borja-Vega. 2024. Water for Shared Prosperity. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Zhang, Linlin, Jiangbo Gao, Ze Tang, and Kewei Jiao. 2021. “Quantifying the Ecosystem Vulnerability to Drought Based on Data Integration and Processes Coupling.” Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 301–302: 108354. https://www. sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/ S016819232100037X. Zou, Xiaoxia, Yu’e Li, Roger Cremades, Qingzhu Gao, Yunfan Wan, and Qin Xiaobo. 2013. “Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Water-Saving Irrigation Technologies Based on Climate Change Response: A Case Study of China.” Agricultural Water Management 129: 9–20. DROUGHT RISK AND RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY 83 W24034