Since climate change, intermittent droughts with various severities, poor management and uncontrolled abstraction of water resources, and inattention to the balance of these resources have caused the water crisis in recent decades, it is vitally important to study the water scarcity, its changes in the future, and the effect of climate change and drought on the scarcity through appropriate management policies in the agricultural sector. To achieve this goal, the present study selected the Fasa plain in Iran and calculated its water poverty index (WPI) from 2008 to 2018 using parametric and non-parametric statistical tests. Also, the study calculated the correlation coefficient between the WPI and climate change and drought in the study area. It then evaluated the effects of water resources management policies in the agricultural sector on the poverty index. The results showed that water consumption had the greatest weight in calculating the WPI. The WPI has fluctuated between 0.297 and 0.678 in the Fasa plain, and the worst situation of water poverty was experienced in 2014. Despite its insignificance, the downward trend in the WPI showed that water resources management has become more unfavorable over time. Finally, it was concluded that the WPI in the Fasa plain was more dependent on drought than on climate change in the short term. Therefore, managing water resource consumption in this plain is vitally important, especially in drought conditions. The results also showed that reducing water consumption in the agricultural sector can significantly improve the WPI. Therefore, solving the water crisis in this plain, given the drought conditions and its future trend, requires policies improving water-use efficiency in the agricultural sector.

  • Calculating the water poverty index and the trend of its changes during different years.

  • Determining the correlation coefficient between the water poverty index and drought and climate indicators.

  • Calculating the five major indicators in relation to the water poverty index.

  • Evaluating water resources management policies on the poverty index.

Graphical Abstract

Graphical Abstract
Graphical Abstract

Water scarcity and water stress have become major global concerns over the past years. Increasing water demand due to population growth, urbanization, industrialization, expansion of agricultural activities, and economic growth are some reasons for water scarcity (Duc et al. 2021; Xiao et al. 2021a, 2021b, 2022; Yang & Usman 2021). In addition to the above-mentioned factors, there are some other parameters, such as climate change, drought, and inefficient water management policies, especially in the agricultural sector (Khadka et al. 2017; Salman et al. 2021; Stenzel et al. 2021) which play a significant role in assessing water stress accurately, determining the areas with water shortage, and developing effective management policies. Examining the current water resource situation and its future changes to identify the depth of the water crisis in each region and provide proper management plans requires the use of appropriate scientific multi-criteria indicators (Ray & Shaw 2019).

In Iran, water is mainly used in the agricultural sector (Nouri et al. 2019). The agricultural sector accounts for 92% of water consumption in Iran, which is much higher than the global average (62%) (Mohammad Jani & Yazdan 2014). Therefore, water resources management policies in the agricultural sector can effectively reduce water scarcity and its consequences. Climate change in Iran has shown itself in the form of increasing droughts and a shortage of water resources (Nazari et al. 2018). Therefore, it is vitally important to study the scarcity of water resources (i.e., water stress) and its future changes and evaluate the consequence of climatic variables and drought with and without appropriate management policies in the agricultural sector of Iran.

To achieve this goal, it is necessary to define climatic, drought, and water scarcity indicators. In the study of climate, the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) index has been one of the most widely used indicators in different parts of the world (Kimura & Moriyama 2019; Zarei et al. 2019a, 2019b). It has been adopted to determine the climatic situation in various studies (Meslier & DiRuggiero 2019; Moghimi & Zarei 2021; Yang et al. 2019; Bahrami et al. 2020; Zarei & Mahmoudi 2021c). For example, Zarei et al. (2019b) showed that the UNEP index is more accurate in determining different regions’ climatic conditions than the modified De Martonne index. Nouri & Bannayan (2019) examined the trend of changes in the spatial and temporal pattern of the climate index in Iran based on the UNEP index from 1966 to 2012 and found that the index had a downward trend.

Another highly recommended index, which is internationally used in examining droughts and determining their severity and frequency, is the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) (Abbasi et al. 2019; Alwan et al. 2019). It has been employed to determine drought conditions in various studies (Polong et al. 2019; Starks et al. 2019; Wang et al. 2019). In the following, some studies are mentioned that have employed this index. For example, Abbasi et al. (2019) have studied and predicted drought in the west of Lake Urmia; Polong et al. (2019) have studied drought's temporal and spatial patterns in Kenya, and Ye et al. (2019) have studied drought's spatial and temporal conditions in Northeast China.

So far, various indicators have been presented to study the scarcity of water resources in different parts of the world, including the Falcon Mark Index, the United Nations Index, the International Water Management Index, the Water Security Index, and the Water Poverty Index (WPI; Ray & Shaw 2019; Shadeed et al. 2019; Wurtz et al. 2019). Many efforts have been made to develop various indicators, methods, and options for quantitative assessment of water stress in the current conditions and its future changes at the regional and national levels (Sullivan et al. 2006). Water resources-related indicators contribute to water adequacy, help ensure food safety and population needs, and are helpful tools for policymakers in water resources management (Koyratty et al. 2021; Ladi et al. 2021; Mishra et al. 2021).

Unlike many indicators, the WPI deals with various aspects affecting the management and development of water resources. It is an effective and comprehensive tool that analyzes the existence of surface water resources and their relationship with human and environmental needs. Due to the unfavorable quantitative and qualitative conditions of water resources, the WPI has been proposed as a multi-criteria and more comprehensive index in the study of water resources (Asiabi Hir et al. 2018).

The WPI has been conceptualized differently in various studies comparing the status of water resources in different regions and countries (Sullivan et al. 2003, 2006; Panthi et al. 2019; Maiolo & Pantusa 2019; Ray & Shaw 2019; Chen et al. 2020; Khadka & Pathak 2021; Koirala et al. 2020). For example, the WPI has been calculated 56 using remote sensing techniques for the environmental component, namely the semi-arid San Luis Potosí region of Mexico, reflecting the strong resource management conflict. Koirala et al. (2020) assessed water stress in 27 areas of the Koshi River Basin in Nepal using the WPI. They selected 12 indicators from the five main components of the poverty index and found that the degree of water poverty in this basin ranged from low to moderate. Chen et al. (2020) argued that water resources on Taiwan's Strait Island are scarce according to the calculated WPI. They also concluded that policies for developing water resources, improving water storage, and controlling groundwater resources could reduce water stress. Khadka & Pathak (2021) examined the correlation between groundwater potential and the WPI in the Midhill region of Nepal and realized that the index is lower than the national level, and the potential of groundwater resources is directly correlated with the WPI.

An international literature review shows that the WPI in the current situation and its trend in the future has not yet been analyzed under climate change, drought, and the application of water resources management policies in the agricultural sector. Therefore, this research has been tried to apply a novel and inventive approach to examine the climate conditions, drought situations, and management policies and their relationship with the WPI. It can be claimed the present study has tried to cover the following objectives: it wants to (a) determine the climatic conditions of the study area during the period under evaluation, (b) evaluate the drought situation of the study region from 2008 to 2018, (c) calculate the WPI in the Fasa plain based on five weight components including resources, accessibility, capacity, use, and environment, and (d) assess the correlation between the WPI and climatic conditions and drought situation (with and without the application of water resources management policies) from 2008 to 2018.

The study area consists of the Fasa plain in Fars province, which is located at east longitude of 53°28′–53°54′ and north latitude of 28° 48′–29° 07′ with an area of 840.21 km2 (Figure 1). It is one of the large plains of Fars province located 100 km away from the south of Shiraz. This plain is also situated at an average of 2,040 meters above sea level and has a dry climate with an average rainfall of 289.01 mm/year and an average temperature of 19.42 °C. It is mountainous in the east and is covered with forests and rangeland areas in the east and west. The agricultural and urban lands are mainly located in the central regions of the plain. The Fasa plain does not have a permanent river, and water is mainly extracted from groundwater for various sectors such as agriculture and drinking. The bedrocks in the mountainous regions are mainly comprised of dolomite and calcite, while the surface of the plain consists of Quaternary deposits (i.e., mainly gravel, sand, sandy loam, and clay). In the bed of this plain, agricultural and livestock activities are the axis of the livelihood economy of the local people; in other words, over 80% of the rural population and about 20% of the urban population of Fasa are engaged in agricultural activities and animal husbandry. The dependence of these activities on water resources, the lack of proper management of water abstraction in farms, and the impact of climate change and drought on water resources in this plain have caused the focus on water resources management. Accordingly, this study tries to calculate the WPI in the Fasa plain.

Figure 1

Land use, digital elevation model (DEM), and stream network maps of the study area.

Figure 1

Land use, digital elevation model (DEM), and stream network maps of the study area.

Close modal
The WPI was adopted to determine the status of water resources in the Fasa plain based on five weight components, namely, resources, accessibility, capacity, use, and environment. According to Sullivan et al. (2003), Sullivan & Meigh (2007), and Ty et al. (2010), their mathematical relation is as follows:
(1)
where R is the resource, A is the accessibility, C is the capacity, U is the use, E is the environment, and W is the weight of each component. This index has a range of changes between zero and one in terms of quantity, representing that zero is the critical condition of water resources, and one is the optimal condition of water resources.

Components of the WPI

Resource

This component determines the extent of natural access to water resources of the Fasa plain. Its indicators include the accessibility index and the variability index, expressed as follows:
(2)
where R1 is the accessibility index, R2 is the variability index, and WR1 and WR2 are the weights of the R1 and R2 indices, respectively. In Equation (1), the accessibility index shows the population pressure on existing water resources. This index is a combination of three criteria, including the per capita annual rainfall criterion in the Fasa plain (R11), the per capita criterion of incoming water resources from the adjacent basins (R12), and the per capita criterion of groundwater resources of the plain (R13) and it was calculated using the following equation:
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
where WR11, WR12, and WR13 are the weights of R11, R12, and R13, respectively. Xi is the annual rainfall in the Fasa plain, Si is the volume of water sources entering the Fasa plain basin from adjacent basins, Ui is the volume of groundwater resources in the Fasa plain, and POP is the total population living in this plain.
The index of variability () indicates climate variability and is calculated by combining the criteria of precipitation changes (R21), temperature changes (R22), and radiation changes (R23) (Hamouda et al. 2009) as follows:
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
where WR21, WR22, and WR23 are the weights of criteria R21, R22, and R23, respectively. Pi is the coefficient variation of annual rainfall, Ti is the coefficient of change of annual temperature, and SOi is the coefficient of radiation change in the study area.

Accessibility

The accessibility indicates adequate access to a sufficient amount of safe and hygienic drinking water. This component was obtained from three indicators of water supply index (A1), health access index (A2), and arable land index (A3) (Asiabi Hir et al. 2018) as follows:
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
where WA1, WA2 and WA3 are the weights of these indicators, respectively. XS is the population with access to safe and hygienic drinking water, Xw is the population with access to sanitation, Cu is the area of arable land, and Re is the internal water resources in the Fasa plain.

Capacity

It shows the effectiveness of the ability of residents in managing water. It also has two indicators: the annual average water storage or the amount of water allocated to each person (C1) and the annual average agricultural lands or the amount of arable land allocated to each person (C2). It is calculated (El-Gafy 2018) as follows:
(15)
(16)
(17)
where WC1 and WC2 are the weights of mentioned indices, respectively. Di is the total water volume in the reservoirs of the existing dams, and Zi is the total area of agricultural lands in the Fasa plain.

Use

In relation to the component of use, water use has been considered for domestic and agricultural purposes and this component examines the amount of water use and the type of water resources exploitation. Accordingly, this component has two indicators: per capita household water use (U1) and per capita agricultural water use (U2):
(18)
(19)
(20)
where WU1 and WU2 are the weights of these indices, Pi is the volume of water used in the household sector, Ki is the total area of irrigated agricultural land, and SUM is the total area of agricultural land in the Fasa plain.

Environment

This component was determined based on the amount of chemical fertilizer per unit area of agricultural land in the Fasa plain, and it was used as an indicator of environmental stress or pressure applied to the ecosystem:
(21)
where Li is the amount of chemical fertilizer and SUM is the total area of agricultural land in the Fasa plain.

Normalization of criteria, indicators, and components

Each criterion, indicator, and component expressed in Equations (1)–(21) are measured using their units. Despite the various units of measurement of criteria, indices, and components, their algebraic sum in the mentioned equations is not possible; therefore, it is necessary to unify or, in other words, to normalize equations to enable integration in them. In this respect, the following equation was used:
(22)
where Xi, Xmin, and Xmax are the value, the minimum, and the maximum of each component, indicator, and criterion, respectively.

Determining the weight of criteria, indices, and components

The entropy weighting method was used to determine the weight of components, indices, and criteria. In this method, first, the probability distribution is determined (Equation (23)), after that, the entropy index is determined (Equation (24)), and then the deviation of information is determined in each index (Equation (25)). Finally, weights were calculated using the amount of deviation from the information (Equation (26)).
(23)
(24)
(25)
(26)
where is the probability of occurrence of ith value in the component, index, or criterion of jth, rij is the frequency percentage of each value in this component, index, or criterion, Ej is the entropy index of jth, Dj is the amount of deviation from the information in jth, and Wj is the weight of jth.

Climate index

The UNEP drought index was employed to assess the annual climatic conditions (Zarei et al. 2019b; Zarei & Mahmoudi 2021a, 2021b). It is calculated based on the ratio of annual rainfall (Pi) to annual potential evapotranspiration (PETi) (UNEP 1992) as follows:
(27)

In the above equation, the Penman–Monteith FAO equation was used to calculate the potential evapotranspiration (Allen et al. 1998). Based on the UNEP method, climatic condition classes are presented in Table 1.

Table 1

Classification of climatic conditions and drought severity based on the UNEP and the SPEI, respectively

Class numberClimatic conditionsUNEP rangeClass numberSPEI rangeDrought class
Humid >0.65 ≥2 Extremely wet 
Sub-humid 0.5–0.65 1.50–1.99 Severely wet 
Semi-arid 0.2 to ≤0.5 1–1.49 Moderately wet 
Arid 0.05 to ≤0.2 −0.99 to 0.99 Near normal 
Hyper arid ≤0.05 −1 to −1.49 Moderate drought 
   −1.5 to −1.49 Severe drought 
   ≤− 2 Extreme drought 
Class numberClimatic conditionsUNEP rangeClass numberSPEI rangeDrought class
Humid >0.65 ≥2 Extremely wet 
Sub-humid 0.5–0.65 1.50–1.99 Severely wet 
Semi-arid 0.2 to ≤0.5 1–1.49 Moderately wet 
Arid 0.05 to ≤0.2 −0.99 to 0.99 Near normal 
Hyper arid ≤0.05 −1 to −1.49 Moderate drought 
   −1.5 to −1.49 Severe drought 
   ≤− 2 Extreme drought 

Drought index

The SPEI was used to assess the annual drought situation. It is based on precipitation and potential evapotranspiration. First, the difference between precipitation (P) and potential evapotranspiration for the i month was obtained from the following equation:
(28)
In this equation, D values at different time scales were obtained from the following equation:
(29)
where k is the desired time scale (months), and n is the desired month in the calculation. Other variables are already defined.
A three-parameter distribution is needed to calculate the drought index to cover the negative D values. And it seems that the logarithmic logistic function properly fits the time series of data at different time scales. The cumulative probability function of the D data series is based on the logarithmic logistic function as follows:
(30)
where α is the scale parameter, and γ is the main parameter for D values in the range between γ and ∞. Based on the SPEI, different drought classes are presented in Table 1.

Investigating the correlation between the WPI and UNEP and SPEI

At this stage, the correlation between WPI and SPEI and UNEP was, first, calculated based on the Equation (31) from 2008 to 2018. After that, the significant level of the calculated coefficient was investigated according to the Fisher table with a freedom degree of n − 2.
(31)
where x and y are the variables under study, and n is the number of data.

Then, the water consumption reduction scenarios in the agricultural sector were presented as a policy approach of policymakers in water resources management to examine the different water resources management policies on the WPI. These scenarios can be played by improving irrigation efficiency through new irrigation technologies and appropriate water transfer systems, cultivating crops that require less water, increasing the use of varieties of drought-resistant crops, and applying low irrigation. Therefore, the impact of water consumption reduction scenarios as the output of appropriate water resources management policies on the WPI is measured using Equation (20).

In this study, the required meteorological data was prepared by the Iran Meteorological Organization. Information about the total volume of water reservoirs of dams, information on water resources (surface and groundwater), incoming and outgoing water, and water consumption in different sectors were provided by the Fasa Water Organization. Statistics of the population and their accessibility to safe drinking water were prepared by the urban and rural water supply department and the central health department of Fasa. Information on agricultural parameters and fertilizers was obtained from the Agricultural Jihad Organization of Fasa.

Trend of WPI components

The resource component is obtained from the total weight of the two indicators of accessibility and variability, considering the same weight for both indicators. The results showed that the value of the calculated resources component ranged from 0.165 to 0.361, and the average value of this component was 0.230 during the years under study (Table 2; Figure 2). The highest and lowest values of the resource component belong to 2011 and 2018, respectively. The value of the resource component for different areas was estimated at 0.61 in Lopez-Alvarez et al. (2020), 0.40 in Koirala et al. (2020), and more than 0.60 in Chen et al. (2020). Comparing the value of the resource component of the study area with other areas shows that the Fasa plain is not in a good position in terms of available water resources.

Table 2

Normalized values of WPI index components in the Fasa plain during 2008–2018

YearComponents
EnvironmentalWater useCapacityAvailabilityResources
2008 0.643 0.954 0.000 0.213 
2009 0.655 0.823 0.000 0.247 
2010 0.863 0.985 0.694 0.013 0.361 
2011 0.685 0.913 0.524 0.025 0.181 
2012 0.839 0.431 0.333 0.202 
2013 0.935 0.604 0.341 0.641 0.275 
2014 0.798 0.000 0.218 0.949 0.211 
2015 0.863 0.276 0.156 0.962 0.190 
2016 0.000 0.840 0.049 0.975 0.190 
2017 0.143 0.841 0.236 0.987 0.299 
2018 0.030 0.790 0.000 0.165 
Average 0.601 0.731 0.406 0.535 0.230 
YearComponents
EnvironmentalWater useCapacityAvailabilityResources
2008 0.643 0.954 0.000 0.213 
2009 0.655 0.823 0.000 0.247 
2010 0.863 0.985 0.694 0.013 0.361 
2011 0.685 0.913 0.524 0.025 0.181 
2012 0.839 0.431 0.333 0.202 
2013 0.935 0.604 0.341 0.641 0.275 
2014 0.798 0.000 0.218 0.949 0.211 
2015 0.863 0.276 0.156 0.962 0.190 
2016 0.000 0.840 0.049 0.975 0.190 
2017 0.143 0.841 0.236 0.987 0.299 
2018 0.030 0.790 0.000 0.165 
Average 0.601 0.731 0.406 0.535 0.230 
Figure 2

Values of accessibility and variability indices and resource component.

Figure 2

Values of accessibility and variability indices and resource component.

Close modal

Figure 3 shows that accessibility had an ascending trend from 2008 to 2018 and reached one in 2018. Therefore, it can be understood that access to safe and healthy agricultural water has been facilitated in the Fasa plain from 2008 to 2018. The high value of the accessibility component has also been proven in other studies, showing the improvement of facilities and technological advances in transportation and health infrastructure around the world (Maiolo & Pantusa 2019; Ray & Shaw 2019; Chen et al. 2020; Khadka & Pathak 2021; Koirala et al. 2020).

Figure 3

Capacity component during 2008–2018.

Figure 3

Capacity component during 2008–2018.

Close modal

Unlike the accessibility, there was a descending trend in the capacity from 2008 to 2018 (Figure 4), indicating that the Fasa plain's residents’ ability to manage water resources has decreased over time. A review of various studies shows that the capacity value is estimated to be higher than 0.50 (Hawrami & Shareef 2020; Koirala et al. 2020; Lopez-Alvarez et al. 2020) in some studies and less than 0.50 in others.

Figure 4

Availability component during 2008–2018.

Figure 4

Availability component during 2008–2018.

Close modal

The use component had a downward trend until 2014 and then had an upward trend (Figure 5). The average value of this component was obtained to be 0.73 for the Fasa plain during the studied years (Table 2). Its normalized value varies from 0 to 1. A comparison of the calculated value of the use in this study with the value of this component in other studies (Maiolo & Pantusa 2019; Panthi et al. 2019; Ray & Shaw 2019; Chen et al. 2020; Khadka & Pathak 2021; Koirala et al. 2020) shows that the level of water consumption is high in the Fasa plain.

Figure 5

Consumption component during 2008–2018.

Figure 5

Consumption component during 2008–2018.

Close modal

The results showed the environment is almost declining and fluctuates wildly during the years under study (Figure 6). The average value of this component is 0.60 during the years under study (Table 3). This component is estimated between 0.20 and 0.60 for different regions of the Strait Island in Taiwan (Chen et al. 2020). The value of this component proved that the use of chemical fertilizers is high in the Fasa plain.

Table 3

Calculated weight for WPI index components

ComponentEnvironmental componentWater useCapacityAvailabilityResources
Weight 0.140 0.474 0.000 0.140 0.246 
ComponentEnvironmental componentWater useCapacityAvailabilityResources
Weight 0.140 0.474 0.000 0.140 0.246 
Figure 6

Environmental component during 2008–2018.

Figure 6

Environmental component during 2008–2018.

Close modal

Calculation of the WPI

The weight of importance of different components was calculated using the entropy model to measure the WPI, which was obtained from the weight composition of the components. Table 3 shows that the highest and lowest weights of importance are related to the use and capacity, respectively. The results of the WPI calculated in Table 4 show that the WPI fluctuated between 0.678 in 2011 and 0.273 in 2015 (Table 4). Therefore, it can be understood that the shortage of water resources (i.e., water stress) has reached its minimum in 2011 and its maximum in 2015. The average WPI of the Fasa plain is equal to 0.562 during the study years. A review of the literature shows that the WPI in most arid and semi-arid regions is between 0.4 and 0.7 (Maiolo & Pantusa 2019; Ray & Shaw 2019; Chen et al. 2020; Hawrami & Shareef 2020; Khadka & Pathak 2021; Koirala et al. 2020).

Table 4

WPI in the Fasa plain during 2008–2018

YearWPIYearWPI
2008 0.594 2014 0.297 
2009 0.626 2015 0.434 
2010 0.678 2016 0.581 
2011 0.576 2017 0.630 
2012 0.634 2018 0.559 
2013 0.575   
YearWPIYearWPI
2008 0.594 2014 0.297 
2009 0.626 2015 0.434 
2010 0.678 2016 0.581 
2011 0.576 2017 0.630 
2012 0.634 2018 0.559 
2013 0.575   

The study of changes in the WPI and its components in the Fasa plain was presented using different statistical methods, as shown in Table 5. According to all statistical methods, namely, Spearman, Mann–Kendall, and linear regression, the results showed that the accessibility component has a significant upward trend, which can be due to the improvement of people's living standards, higher access levels to health, more arable lands as a result of the destruction of pastures and their conversion into agricultural land, and the ease of supplying the required water as a result of technological progress (Table 5). In addition, the capacity has a significant downward trend based on all the methods indicating the reduced effectiveness of residents’ ability to manage water resources over time. The changes in the WPI is descending and meaningless; however, despite its statistical insignificance, this decline is an alarm regarding the critical situation of water resources available for drinking and agricultural use in the coming years. Naturally, this issue highlights the need for the scientific and appropriate management and control of water resources in the study area.

Table 5

Results of the trend of changes in the WPI and its components during 2008–2018

Components and indicatorsSpearman's dtatisticsMann–Kendall testSlope of regression Line
Resource component −1.216 −0.981 −0.005 
Availability component 4.589* 3.125* 0.130* 
Capacity component −4.213* −2.941* −0.093* 
Use component −2.112* −1.781 −0.036 
Environmental component −1.201 −0.681 −0.069* 
WPI −1.380 −1.031 −0.010 
Components and indicatorsSpearman's dtatisticsMann–Kendall testSlope of regression Line
Resource component −1.216 −0.981 −0.005 
Availability component 4.589* 3.125* 0.130* 
Capacity component −4.213* −2.941* −0.093* 
Use component −2.112* −1.781 −0.036 
Environmental component −1.201 −0.681 −0.069* 
WPI −1.380 −1.031 −0.010 

*The trend of changes at the 5% level is significant.

Calculation of the UNEP climate index

Based on the UNEP climate index results, the best and worst years were 2016 and 2017, with index values of 0.279 and 0.027, respectively, in terms of climatic conditions (Figure 7). Studies have shown that this index has an insignificant upward trend in the period under review.

Figure 7

UNEP climate Index during 2008–2018.

Figure 7

UNEP climate Index during 2008–2018.

Close modal

Calculation of the annual SPEI drought index

Based on the SPEI calculated in the statistical period under review, the most severe drought occurred in 2017 (with the SPEI equal to −3.29), while the most severe wet year (with the SPEI equal to 3.483) occurred in 2016. Studies showed that this index had an insignificant downward trend in the period under study (Figure 8).

Figure 8

SPEI drought index during the years 2008–2018.

Figure 8

SPEI drought index during the years 2008–2018.

Close modal

Correlation coefficient between the WPI and UNEP and SPEI

The correlation coefficient between the WPI and UNEP and SPEI in Table 6 showed that the correlation with drought is more significant than the correlation with climate. The correlation coefficient between the WPI and UNEP and SPEI is 0.039 and 0.414, respectively, affected by the short-term effects of drought on water resources. However, climate is a long-term phenomenon and its effects in the short term (11-year period under study) are not very tangible. Therefore, drought is a factor affecting the WPI; however, the effect of climate change on the WPI is not proven in the period under review (i.e., a short period).

Table 6

Correlation coefficient between the studied indicators in the statistical period in the Fasa plain

SPEIUNEP indexWPI index
WPI index – – 
UNEP index — 0.039 
SPEI index 0.732* 0.414* 
SPEIUNEP indexWPI index
WPI index – – 
UNEP index — 0.039 
SPEI index 0.732* 0.414* 

*The correlation coefficient at the 5% level is significant.

Calculation of the WPI by applying water resources management policies in the agricultural sector

Agricultural policymakers can reduce water consumption in agriculture by applying appropriate policies to encourage farmers to improve irrigation efficiency through new irrigation technologies and water transfer systems, cultivating crops that require less water, using more varieties of drought-resistant crops, and poor irrigation. In the present study, three water consumption reduction scenarios (10, 15, and 20%) were applied in the agricultural sector of the Fasa plain with the help of policies such as improving irrigation efficiency through the use of new irrigation technologies, and their effects on the WPI were investigated (Table 7). The results showed that the application of irrigation efficiency improvement policies in the agricultural sector of the Fasa plain could increase the average WPI during the years under study. Therefore, the WPI was 0.594, 0.622, and 0.659 with applying water consumption reduction scenarios of 10, 15, and 20%, respectively. The percentage change of the WPI for scenarios of 10, 15, and 20% of water resources consumption reduction compared to the case without using scenarios is equal to 5.69, 10.68, and 17.26%, respectively. This finding shows that as the decrease in water consumption intensifies, the rate of increase in the WPI has become close to the rate of decrease in water consumption. Therefore, further water resources reduction can significantly increase the WPI and solve the water crisis in the Fasa plain.

Table 7

WPI with and without the application of water resources management policies

YearWPI without change in policiesWPI by applying water resources management policies
10% reduction in water consumption15% reduction in water consumption20% reduction in water consumption
2008 0.594 0.636 0.669 0.716 
2009 0.626 0.679 0.727 0.797 
2010 0.678 0.723 0.774 0.837 
2011 0.576 0.614 0.645 0.689 
2012 0.634 0.666 0.697 0.734 
2013 0.575 0.601 0.622 0.650 
2014 0.297 0.309 0.322 0.344 
2015 0.434 0.450 0.461 0.473 
2016 0.581 0.611 0.636 0.664 
2017 0.630 0.661 0.686 0.713 
2018 0.559 0.586 0.605 0.627 
Average 0.562 0.594 (5.69%) 0.622 (10.68%) 0.659 (17.26%) 
YearWPI without change in policiesWPI by applying water resources management policies
10% reduction in water consumption15% reduction in water consumption20% reduction in water consumption
2008 0.594 0.636 0.669 0.716 
2009 0.626 0.679 0.727 0.797 
2010 0.678 0.723 0.774 0.837 
2011 0.576 0.614 0.645 0.689 
2012 0.634 0.666 0.697 0.734 
2013 0.575 0.601 0.622 0.650 
2014 0.297 0.309 0.322 0.344 
2015 0.434 0.450 0.461 0.473 
2016 0.581 0.611 0.636 0.664 
2017 0.630 0.661 0.686 0.713 
2018 0.559 0.586 0.605 0.627 
Average 0.562 0.594 (5.69%) 0.622 (10.68%) 0.659 (17.26%) 

Finally, the results showed that water consumption management is the most critical measure for reducing water poverty in the Fasa plain, especially in the agricultural sector. As water consumption is in the field of demand in terms of the economic approach, so it is necessary instead of using grammatical tools, demand management in the Fasa plain should be on the agenda to adjust water consumption. According to the results, the WPI quickly depends on drought than climate change. Therefore, it can be understood that drought, despite climate change, will have adverse effects on the water crisis in the Fasa plain in a short time. To this end, it is necessary to use water management policies in the agricultural sector to reduce water consumption and mitigate the unfavorable situation of the water crisis under drought conditions. The results showed that policies of water consumption reduction in the agricultural sector could significantly improve the WPI. Therefore, it is necessary to reduce farmers’ water consumption and solve the water crisis of the drought conditions by teaching agricultural ways such as using new irrigation technologies and proper water transfer systems to farms to increase farmers’ water consumption efficiency and effectiveness.

This study investigated the effects of climate change, drought, and water resources management policies in the WPI and found that the WPI varied from 0.297 to 0.678 in the study area from 2008 to 2018, while its average was 0.562. Therefore, it can be concluded that the region has a moderate water crisis. The trend of different WPI components from 2008 to 2018 showed that the accessibility had a significant upward trend (at the 5% level), and the capacity had a significant downward trend (at the 5% level). The upward trend of accessibility is due to the ease of access to the required water due to the advancement of technology, high level of access to health, and more arable lands due to the destruction of pastures, turning them into farmland over time. The declining trend of capacity also shows that residents’ ability to manage water resources has decreased over time. On the other hand, the downward trend of the WPI, despite its insignificance, showed that the situation of water resources management has been in a more unfavorable situation over time. The results showed that the use has played a more significant role in the occurrence of this challenge than other components.

The authors thank the Iranian Meteorological Organization, the Water Organization of Fars, and the Agriculture Jahad Fars Organization for their cooperation in providing the necessary data.

The participation of authors includes the data collection, analyzing the results, and writing the article.

The authors confirm that this article is original research and has not been published or presented previously.

No funds, grants, or other support were received.

The authors have no conflict of interest. Also, the authors certify that they are not affiliated with or involved with any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this paper.

Data cannot be made publicly available; readers should contact the corresponding author for details.

Abbasi
A.
,
Khalili
K.
,
Behmanesh
J.
&
Shirzad
A.
2019
Drought monitoring and prediction using SPEI index and gene expression programming model in the west of Urmia Lake
.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology
138
(
1
), pp.
553
-
567
.
Allen
R. G.
,
Pereira
L. S.
,
Raes
D.
&
Smith
M.
1998
Crop Evapotranspiration. Guidelines for Computing Crop Water Requirements. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 56, Roma, Italy
.
Alwan
I. A.
,
Ziboon
A. R. T.
&
Khalaf
A. G.
2019
Utilization of reconnaissance drought index (RDI) for monitoring of meteorological drought over middle Euphrates region during the period from 1988 to 2017
.
IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering
518
(
2)
,
022035
.
Asiabi Hir
R.
,
Mostafazadeh
R.
,
Raoof
M.
&
Esmali Ouri
A.
2018
Multi-criteria evaluation of water poverty index spatial variations in some watersheds of Ardabil Province
.
Ecohydrology
4
(
4
),
997
1009
.
Hamouda
M. A.
,
El-Din
M. M. N.
&
Moursy
F. I.
2009
Vulnerability assessment of water resources systems in the Eastern Nile Basin
.
Water Resources Management
23
(
13
),
2697
2725
.
Hawrami
K. S.
&
Shareef
A. J.
2020
Application of water poverty index (WPI) in special analysis of water stress in Kurdistan Region-Iraq
.
European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences
9
(
4
),
708
.
Khadka
R. B.
,
Kandel
S.
,
Sharma
K.
,
Dhamala
M. K.
&
Ghimire
S.
2017
Climate change vulnerability assessment of Chisapani VDC of Ramechhap District
.
International Journal of Environmental Sciences & Natural Resources
1
(
3
),
65
71
.
Kimura
R.
&
Moriyama
M.
2019
Recent trends of annual aridity indices and classification of arid regions with satellite-based aridity indices
.
Remote Sensing in Earth Systems Sciences
2
(
2
), pp.
88
95
.
Koirala
S.
,
Fang
Y.
,
Dahal
N. M.
,
Zhang
C.
,
Pandey
B.
&
Shrestha
S.
2020
Application of water poverty index (WPI) in spatial analysis of water stress in Koshi River Basin, Nepal
.
Sustainability
12
(
2
),
727
.
Koyratty
N.
,
Jones
A. D.
,
Schuster
R.
,
Kordas
K.
,
Li
C. S.
,
Mbuya
M. N.
,
Boateng
G. O.
,
Ntozini
R.
,
Chasekwa
B.
,
Humphrey
J. H.
&
Smith
L. E.
2021
Food insecurity and water insecurity in rural Zimbabwe: development of multidimensional household measures
.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
18
(
11
),
6020
.
Lopez-Alvarez
B.
,
Urbano-Peña
M. A.
,
Moran-Ramírez
J.
,
Ramos-Leal
J. A.
&
Tuxpan-Vargas
J.
2020
Estimation of the environment component of the Water Poverty Index via remote sensing in semi-arid zones
.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
65
(
16
), pp.
2647
2657
.
Maiolo
M.
&
Pantusa
D.
2019
Sustainable water management index, SWaM index
.
Cogent Engineering
6
(
1
),
1603817
.
Meslier
V.
&
DiRuggiero
J.
2019
Endolithic microbial communities as model systems for ecology and astrobiology
. In:
J. Seckbach & P. Rampelotto, eds
.
Model Ecosystems in Extreme Environments
.
Academic Press
, Baltimore, MD, pp.
145
168
.
Mishra
B. K.
,
Kumar
P.
,
Saraswat
C.
,
Chakraborty
S.
&
Gautam
A.
2021
Water security in a changing environment: concept, challenges and solutions
.
Water
13
(
4
),
490
.
Moghimi
M. M.
&
Zarei
A. R.
2021
Evaluating performance and applicability of several drought indices in arid regions
.
Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences
57
(
3
), pp.
645
661
.
Mohammad Jani
I.
&
Yazdanian
N.
2014
The analysis of water crisis conjecture in Iran and the exigent measures for its management
.
Trend (Trend of Economic Research)
21
,
117
144
.
Nazari
B.
,
Liaghat
A.
,
Akbari
M. R.
&
Keshavarz
M.
2018
Irrigation water management in Iran: implications for water use efficiency improvement
.
Agricultural Water Management
208
,
7
18
.
Nouri
A.
,
Saghafian
B.
,
Delavar
M.
&
Bazargan-Lari
M. R.
2019
Agent-based modeling for evaluation of crop pattern and water management policies
.
Water Resources Management
33
(
11
),
3707
3720
.
Panthi
J.
,
Khatiwada
K. R.
,
Shrestha
M. L.
&
Dahal
P.
2019
Water poverty in the context of climate change: a case study from Karnali river basin in Nepal Himalaya
.
International Journal of River Basin Management
17
(
2
),
243
250
.
Polong
F.
,
Chen
H.
,
Sun
S.
&
Ongoma
V.
2019
Temporal and spatial evolution of the standard precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI) in the Tana River Basin, Kenya
.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology
138
(
1
), pp.
777
792
.
Ray
B.
&
Shaw
R.
2019
Developing water security index for urban areas
. In:
B. Ray & R. Shaw, eds.
Urban Drought
.
Springer
,
Singapore
, pp.
53
68
Salman
S. A.
,
Shahid
S.
,
Sharafati
A.
,
Ahmed Salem
G. S.
,
Abu Bakar
A.
,
Farooque
A. A.
,
Chung
E. S.
,
Ahmed
Y. A.
,
Mikhail
B.
&
Yaseen
Z. M.
2021
Projection of agricultural water stress for climate change scenarios: a regional case study of Iraq
.
Agriculture
11
(
12
),
1288
.
Starks
P. J.
,
Steiner
J. L.
,
Neel
J. P.
,
Turner
K. E.
,
Northup
B. K.
,
Gowda
P. H.
&
Brown
M. A.
2019
Assessment of the standardized precipitation and evaporation index (SPEI) as a potential management tool for grasslands
.
Agronomy
9
(
5
),
235
.
Stenzel
F.
,
Greve
P.
,
Lucht
W.
,
Tramberend
S.
,
Wada
Y.
&
Gerten
D.
2021
Irrigation of biomass plantations may globally increase water stress more than climate change
.
Nature Communications
12
(
1
),
1
9
.
Sullivan
C. A.
,
Meigh
J. R.
,
Giacomello
A. M.
,
Fediw
T.
,
Lawrence
P.
,
Samad
M.
,
Mlote
S.
,
Hutton
C.
,
Allan
J. A.
,
Schule
R. E.
,
Dlamini
D. J. M.
,
Cosgrove
W.
,
Priscolli
J. D.
,
Gleick
P.
,
Smout
I.
,
Cobbing
J.
,
Callow
R.
,
Hunt
C.
,
Hussain
A.
,
Acreman
M. C.
,
King
J.
,
Malomo
S.
,
Tate
E. L.
,
O'Regan
D.
,
Milner
S.
&
Steyl
I.
2003
The water poverty index: development and application at the community scale
.
Natural Resources Forum
27
,
89
199
.
Sullivan
C.
,
Meigh
J.
&
Lawrence
P.
2006
Application of the water poverty index at different scales: a cautionary tale
.
Water International
31
(
3
),
412
426
.
Ty
T. V.
,
Sunada
K.
,
Ichikawa
Y.
&
Oishi
S.
2010
Evaluation of the state of water resources using modified water poverty index: a case study in the Srepok river basin, Vietnam-Cambodia
.
International Journal of River Basin Management
8
(
3–4
),
305
317
.
United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP)
1992
World Atlas of Desertification
.
Wang
L.
,
Yu
H.
,
Yang
M.
,
Yang
R.
,
Gao
R.
&
Wang
Y.
2019
A drought index: the standardized precipitation evapotranspiration runoff index
.
Journal of Hydrology
571
,
651
668
.
Wurtz
M.
,
Angeliaume
A.
,
Herrera
M. T. A.
,
Blot
F.
,
Paegelow
M.
&
Reyes
V. M.
2019
A spatial application of the water poverty index (WPI) in the State of Chihuahua, Mexico
.
Water Policy
21
(
1
),
147
161
.
Xiao
Y.
,
Liu
K.
,
Yan
H.
,
Zhou
B.
,
Huang
X.
,
Hao
Q.
,
Zhang
Y.
,
Zhang
Y.
,
Liao
X.
&
Yin
S.
2021a
Hydrogeochemical constraints on groundwater resource sustainable development in the arid Golmud alluvial fan plain on Tibetan plateau
.
Environmental Earth Sciences
80
(
22
),
1
17
.
Xiao
Y.
,
Xiao
D.
,
Hao
Q.
,
Liu
K.
,
Wang
R.
,
Huang
X.
,
Liao
X.
&
Zhang
Y.
2021
Accessible Phreatic Groundwater Resources in the Central Shijiazhuang of North China Plain: Perspective From the Hydrogeochemical Constraints
.
Front. Environ. Sci.
9:747097. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2021.747097.
Xiao
Y.
,
Hao
Q.
,
Zhang
Y.
,
Zhu
Y.
,
Yin
S.
,
Qin
L.
&
Li
X.
2022
Investigating sources, driving forces and potential health risks of nitrate and fluoride in groundwater of a typical alluvial fan plain
.
Science of the Total Environment
802
,
149909
.
Ye
L.
,
Shi
K.
,
Zhang
H.
,
Xin
Z.
,
Hu
J.
&
Zhang
C.
2019
Spatio-temporal analysis of drought indicated by SPEI over northeastern China
.
Water
11
(
5
),
908
.
Zarei
A. R.
&
Mahmoudi
M. R.
2021c
Influence of human activities on meteorological drought and its trends in Iran
.
Arabian Journal of Geosciences
14
(
10
),
1
13
.
Zarei
A. R.
,
Moghimi
M. M.
&
Bahrami
M.
2019a
Comparison of reconnaissance drought index (RDI) and effective reconnaissance drought index (eRDI) to evaluate drought severity
.
Sustainable Water Resources Management
5
(
3
),
1345
1356
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY 4.0), which permits copying, adaptation and redistribution, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).