The Wei River Basin has suffered from severe droughts. It is essential to build drought relief projects to cope with drought disasters. Traditionally, design quantiles have been estimated using univariate analysis, in which multiple characteristics of hydrological events are not considered. To design the more appropriate hydrological projects for the case study area, the Wei River Basin, it is essential to conduct research on multivariate analysis allowing multiple characteristics to be considered simultaneously. Here, the authors focus on hydrological drought (the basis for designing a hydrological project), and a framework to calculate the joint design quantiles of three drought characteristics is proposed. The most likely design quantiles relating to a specific return period, reflecting the highest occurrence probabilities among multiple combinations of variables, are derived by the maximum joint probability density function. Results show that compared to univariate analysis, design quantiles calculated via joint return period yield infrastructure with a smaller total storage capacity in the study area relating to a specific return period, i.e., reduces the economic input while maintaining the project safety. Proposed methods bring new sights to the design project. However, multi-method comparisons considering more uncertainties, inherent laws, investment, and other limited factors are still vital.

  • A new framework for calculating the multivariate joint design quantiles of drought characteristics is proposed.

  • The multidimensional joint drought return period is computed using the secondary return period method, allowing multiple drought characteristics to be considered.

  • Three hydrological drought characteristics (duration, peak, and severity) are considered simultaneously to reflect the multiple negative effects of droughts.

Around the world, the hydrological processes have been altered and extreme hydrological events have occurred frequently (Neupane & Kumar 2015; Tenagashaw et al. 2022) due to both climate change (atmospheric circulation, precipitation, and evaporation) and anthropomorphic factors (land use, population growth, industrialization, and socioeconomic development) (Legesse et al. 2004; Kundu et al. 2017; Yang et al. 2019). Among the extreme hydrological events, drought characterized by long duration has been considered as one of the most widespread, complex, and serious disasters (Rojas 2018; Mohammed et al. 2022). It is estimated that global economic losses caused by droughts exceed 6 billion dollars (Wilhite 2000; Yang et al. 2018). Droughts have had a serious effect on agricultural production, the quality of residents’ lives, and the fragile ecological environment (Hou et al. 2019; Hu et al. 2021). How to reduce drought damage has become an urgent issue (Mishra & Singh 2010; Logar & van den Bergh 2013; Saini et al. 2021).

Drought can be divided into a meteorological, agricultural, hydrological, and socioeconomic drought (lack of precipitation, soil moisture, surface or groundwater resources, and commodities, respectively) summarized by the American Meteorological Society (Heim 2002; Sadegh et al. 2017). Hydrological drought is characterized by low surface, reservoir, and underground water levels (Hateren et al. 2019). This type of drought is considered ‘thorough’, i.e., it most accurately reflects the basin water shortage and complexity of drought resistance (Keyantash & Dracup 2002; Wu et al. 2019). Hydrological drought evaluation is an important basis for determining the construction scale of drought relief projects and formulating operational management strategies (Zhang et al. 2022). It is essential to conduct research about how to determine the drought relief project scale based on hydrological drought evaluation for reducing drought damage.

Estimation of the return period is a criterion for measuring the expected recurrence interval of a hazard and quantifying the design quantiles (usually defined as the values of a variable under a given return period) of key variables in a water system, which is a process necessary for reasonably determining the scale of a water project (Salvadori 2004; Salvadori et al. 2011a, 2011b). Univariate statistical analysis is the traditional method to estimate the return period for project scale design (Gräler et al. 2013). The project scale is determined based on the inverse function of the single variable marginal distribution function and the return period (Salvadori & De Michele 2007; Volpi & Fiori 2014). However, hydrologic events are often characterized by the joint behavior of multiple variables (Tootoonchi et al. 2021). For example, there are three main drought characteristics responsible for the multiple negative effects of drought: drought duration, peak, and severity (Yang et al. 2018). The main flood characteristics are duration, peak, and volume (Grimaldi & Serinaldi 2006). Different characteristics correspond to different properties of the natural disaster. Univariate statistical analysis is not sufficient to reflect the complex and interactive relationship among multiple variables (Sadegh et al. 2017; Ballarin et al. 2021). Hydrologic event return period analysis involving the use of multiple characteristics may be more comprehensive than that based on a single characteristic (Salvadori & De Michele 2007; Tootoonchi et al. 2021). It is vital to determine the project scale based on a multivariate joint return period involving multiple drought characteristics.

Copula is a popular tool to describe the internal complex linear or nonlinear relationships among different variables (Dodangeh et al. 2017). It is a candidate for the multivariate joint project design which is of simple, flexible, and margin-free characteristics (Gyasi-Agyei 2012). Multivariate copulas commonly used include Gaussian, Student-t, and Archimedean copulas. However, they all possess shortcomings. For example, the marginal distribution functions for the different variables of Gaussian copulas must be normal (Pereira et al. 2017). Student-t copulas do not have asymmetric dependencies (Bhatti & Do 2019). Multivariate Archimedean copulas can only model positive dependence. In addition, in three dimensions, the asymmetric schemes are only useful when two correlation structures are equal and lower than the third correlation (Grimaldi & Serinaldi 2006). Against this background, the Vine copula was proposed by Bedford & Cooke in 2001 based on pair copulas. Vine copulas decompose the multivariate joint function into a series of stagewise mixing of bivariate copulas, allowing the former to model more flexible dependence structures and reflect asymmetric dependence (Pereira et al. 2017; et al. 2020; Dixit & Jayakumar 2022).

Several studies have employed the Vine copulas to overcome univariate limitations in project design. For example, Gräler et al. (2013) designed hydrology characteristics of discharges composed of annual maximum peak discharge, volume, and duration. Vandenberghe et al. (2012) estimated the design quantiles of extreme discharge events including three variables: peak discharge, volume, and duration. However, there is still a limited number of studies focusing on using the Vine copulas to estimate joint design quantiles of drought in which three-dimensional multiple variables such as duration, peak, and severity are considered simultaneously. Therefore, the main purposes of this study are to (1) quantify the complex relationship among hydrological drought characteristics in three dimensions (including drought duration, peak, and severity) based on Vine copulas; and (2) compare the design quantiles of the scale of drought relief project based on the univariate and multivariate framework.

This is a case study of the Wei River Basin (WRB). The WRB is an important economic, agricultural, and cultural region. However, this region has suffered from frequent droughts (Yang et al. 2018). With recent rapid social and economic development, the water shortage has become more acute and the ecological environment has been more fragile (Chang et al. 2016). Drought is one of the most serious disasters restricting sustainable development in the WRB (Chang et al. 2016). It is vital to determine the scale of the drought relief project for reducing the drought damage in the WRB. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is one of the early tries to design the drought relief project scale from a multidimensional perspective especially in particular for the WRB. Overall, this study could enhance the understanding of drought events and provide support for drought relief project design.

The Wei River is the largest tributary of the Yellow River, flowing through Gansu, Ningxia, and Shaanxi three provincial-level administrative regions (Yang et al. 2018). It is a typical arid and semi-arid region, situated in Northwest China. Annual precipitation, evaporation, and average temperature are approximately 559 mm, 850 mm, and 10.6 °C, respectively. It is a water-deficient region. In addition, water demand has increased due to rapid development. Thus, droughts occur frequently (Yang et al. 2018). In this study, the WRB is taken as a case study area, and the joint drought return period and joint design quantiles of drought characteristics are estimated (to be used for better water project planning and water resource management).

The WRB is commonly divided into three sub-basins (Figure 1): the Jing River Basin (JRB), the Beiluo River Basin (BRB), and the mainstream of the Wei River Basin (MSWRB). These three sub-basins are chosen as the study areas in which to verify the feasibility of the proposed framework. Monthly streamflow data of the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB are collected from the Zhangjiashan, Zhuangtou, and Huaxian hydrological stations, respectively. The available data period is from 1956 to 2015. The runoff data (and its corresponding trends) of the three sub-basins are plotted in Figure 2. Figure 2 shows that the runoff from the three sub-basins shows a declining trend.
Figure 1

Sub-basins of the WRB.

Figure 1

Sub-basins of the WRB.

Close modal
Figure 2

Trends of the average runoff of the WRB.

Figure 2

Trends of the average runoff of the WRB.

Close modal
Considering univariate frequency analysis is not suitable for estimating joint variables design quantiles (Gräler et al. 2013), in this case study, Vine copulas are employed for multidimensional design quantiles analysis. To compare the design quantiles calculated by the univariate and multivariate framework, the first is to identify the drought events as well as the drought characteristics variables including duration, peak, and severity (Section 3.1). Then is to derive the property, i.e., to derive the marginal distribution function of a single variable. Based on the univariate properties, design quantiles based on the univariate framework can be computed (Section 3.2). After that, properties of compound drought events, i.e., joint distributions considering three drought characteristics variables simultaneously are quantified through Vine copulas (Section 3.3). The last is to estimate the design quantiles based on a multivariate framework by using a systematic sampling method (Section 3.4). The primary flow chart for deriving the joint design quantiles of the drought characteristics is shown in Figure 3. Detailed descriptions in the flowchart are described in the following sections.
Figure 3

Flow chart of deriving the joint design quantiles of the three drought characteristics.

Figure 3

Flow chart of deriving the joint design quantiles of the three drought characteristics.

Close modal

Hydrological drought events identification

Hydrological drought is very complicated and is not only affected by meteorological factors (long-term precipitation deficits) but also by anthropogenic ones (such as reservoir regulation and water demand). To describe the water deficit (an understanding of which is necessary for the design of a drought relief project), the first is to identify the hydrological drought events. In this study, the Runoff Anomaly Percentage (RAP) is selected as the hydrological drought index (Chang et al. 2016). This method is simple and could reflect the drought induced by a runoff anomaly (Yang et al. 2018). The formula is shown in Equation (1). Drought is defined as an event whose monthly RAP values are below 0.
(1)
where R is the monthly runoff (108m3); represents the average monthly runoff (108m3).

Next, based on the theory of runs and predetermined truncation levels (RAP = 0), three drought characteristics are identified: the consecutive period in which the RAP is less than 0, that is, the drought duration (D); the maximal monthly water deficit (the maximal difference between the runoff in a drought event period and the average runoff), that is, the drought peak (P); and the total water deficit in a drought event period, that is, the drought severity (S) (Shiau et al. 2007).

Estimation of design quantiles based on univariate marginal distribution function

To derive the property of a single variable, five marginal distribution functions are utilized to fit a single drought characteristic. These marginal distribution functions include Gamma, Weibull, Exponential, Rayleigh, and Log-normal. The parameters of each marginal distribution function are estimated based on the maximum likelihood algorithm via MATLAB.

To determine the marginal distribution function with the best fit, the root mean square error (RMSE) is utilized for the goodness-of-fit test (Yang et al. 2019). The RMSE reflects the difference between the theoretical and empirical cumulative probabilities. A low RMSE value indicates a good match between the theoretical and cumulative probabilities. Theoretical cumulative probabilities are derived through the marginal distribution function, equations can be found in Yang et al. (2018). Empirical cumulative probabilities of the drought characteristics are estimated based on the Gringorten formula (Gringorten 1963; Kao & Govindaraju 2007).

Finally, the design quantiles of a single drought characteristic under the univariate framework are calculated based on the inverse functions of the optimal marginal distribution functions relating to specific return periods (Ballarin et al. 2021) as displayed in the following equations.
(2)
(3)
where means the univariate return period; a represents the average inter-arrival time of the drought events, i.e., average interval time between ith and (i + 1)th drought events, a unit of the year (Ballarin et al. 2021); indicates the cumulative probability distribution function; , , and is the design quantile of duration, severity, and peak derived by the univariate framework; , , and is the cumulative probability distribution function of duration, severity, and peak, respectively.

Joint distribution of the drought characteristics

Vine copulas are employed in this study to decompose the multivariate joint distribution function based on stagewise mixing of bivariate distribution functions, a flexible process that reflects the complex interactions among the different variables well. Two copulas – the canonical vine (C-Vine) and the drawable vine (D-Vine) – are used most frequently for this purpose (Montes-Iturrizaga & Heredia-Zavoni 2016). C-Vine copulas involve all the mutual dependences of the same variable, while D-Vine copulas involve consecutive mutual dependences (Gräler et al. 2013). In the three-dimensional case, there is no difference between the C-Vine and D-Vine copulas (Nguyen-Huy et al. 2017). A diagram of the use of the C-Vine copulas to construct the joint distribution of duration, peak, and severity is shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4

Construction of the joint distribution using the C-Vine copulas.

Figure 4

Construction of the joint distribution using the C-Vine copulas.

Close modal
The severity is taken as the root node, as is shown in Figure 4. The cumulative probability distribution functions of drought duration (D), severity (S), and peak (P) are represented as , , and , respectively. In the first tree, the pairwise dependencies are constructed using two bivariate copulas (C12 and C23). Next, in the second tree, the dependence among the three variables () is constructed based on another bivariate copula via partial differentiation of the two bivariate copulas (C12 and C23) obtained in the first tree. The conditional cumulative distribution functions ( and ) in terms of severity are expressed in Equations (4) and (5). In total, the dependencies among the three variables can be represented using three bivariate copulas. Vine copulas decompose the full-density function into a product of bivariate density functions (Gräler et al. 2013).
(4)
(5)

In this study, three widely used bivariate copulas – the Gumbel, Clayton, and Frank – are employed to derive the bivariate joint distribution of the hydrological drought characteristics. The equations are displayed in Table 1. The Frank bivariate copula is symmetric, while the Gumbel and Clayton are asymmetric. The Gumbel best represents the upper tail dependence, while the Clayton represents the lower tail dependence best (Nelsen 2006). The optimal parameters corresponding to the three bivariate copulas are first estimated using the RMSE. The joint theoretical and empirical cumulative probabilities can be found in Yang et al. (2018). Next, the copulas whose RMSE values are the lowest are considered optimal.

Table 1

Distribution functions of three bivariate Archimedean copulas

Copulas typeDistribution function C(u,v)Scope of the parameter Generator
Gumbel    
Clayton    
Frank    
Copulas typeDistribution function C(u,v)Scope of the parameter Generator
Gumbel    
Clayton    
Frank    

In fact, there are lots of copulas that can be utilized for bivariate analysis such as total 26 copula families shown in Table 1 of Sadegh et al. (2017). The calculations of these copula families are freely available to the public. However, in the following Section 3.4, the ‘secondary return period’ (also called Kendall's return period) is utilized to compute the multidimensional joint return period which is based on the Kendall's distribution function (KC) (Corbella & Stretch 2012; Rad et al. 2017). The general analytical expressions of KC are known except for some special cases like that of bivariate extreme value copulas and some Archimedean copulas (Salvadori et al. 2011a). Therefore, in this study, three bivariate Archimedean copulas are chosen as candidates for the following analysis. Using more copula families to solve the multivariate analysis will be the authors’ future research purpose.

It should be noted that due to the variability of the model structure, in the three-dimensional case, there are a total of three decompositions (three variables appearing as the root nodes in the first tree). The results depend on the particular decomposition. It is particularly important to determine the root node in the first tree to further determine the relationships among the three variables. In this study, the maximum spanning tree is employed to select the pairwise copulas (Brechmann et al. 2012). The core idea is to calculate the Kendall's tau nonparametric association measure (calculations can be found in Fredricks & Nelsen 2007) of two randomly chosen variables. The variable corresponding to the maximum sum of Kendall's tau calculated from the two other variables is chosen as the root node in the first tree.

Estimation of the joint design quantiles based on a multivariate framework

The joint design quantiles of the three drought characteristics determined via joint drought return periods are more complex than those determined by traditional univariate drought return period analysis (Volpi & Fiori 2014). Drought characteristics design quantiles determined by univariate drought return period analysis are based only on the inverse function of the marginal distribution function and a given return period (frequency). This method is simple and has only one result (Salvadori et al. 2011b). Using the multivariate joint drought return period to estimate the joint design quantiles yields infinite results. The joint design quantiles of two of the characteristics under a given return period constitute an isoline. The joint design quantiles of three of the characteristics constitute an isosurface (Salvadori et al. 2011b). For water conservancy planning purposes, one combination of these design quantiles must be chosen, and in practical drought risk management, economic savings are prioritized to achieve more benefits. Thus, for a given return period, the most likely joint design quantiles of the drought characteristics should be chosen for project planning (Sadegh et al. 2018). As probability density reflects the occurrence probability (Salvadori et al. 2011b; Corbella & Stretch 2012), the most likely joint design point () coincide with the case whose occurrence probability, i.e., three-dimensional joint probability density function is the highest relating to specific joint return periods (Gräler et al. 2013; Sadegh et al. 2018). Then, the most likely joint design quantiles can be calculated.
(6)
(7)
where , , and are the multivariate joint design quantile of duration, severity, and peak derived by multivariate framework corresponding to the most likely point (); is the three-dimensional joint probability density function relating to specific joint return periods .
To calculate the joint drought return period, there are already many methods. Two joint return period methods (corresponding to the ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ cases) are the most common methods (Shiau 2006). In the ‘AND’ case, all the drought characteristics exceed given thresholds, while in the ‘OR’ case, at least one characteristic surpasses a given threshold (De Michele et al. 2007). Therefore, although the cumulative probability functions are the same in the two cases, there are differences between the joint return periods (Rad et al. 2017). In addition, in theory, an endangered region corresponding to a lower joint probability should cover that corresponding to a higher joint probability. Two identical joint probabilities should correspond to a unique endangered region (Corbella & Stretch 2012). However, ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ drought joint return period calculation methods have limitations. The definitions are not strict enough, which may lead to a misrepresentation of the hydrological processes. Based on these two calculation methods, Salvadori et al. (2011b) proposed a widely used ‘secondary return period’ (also called Kendall's return period) (Corbella & Stretch 2012; Rad et al. 2017). In practical terms, for a given return period, the secondary return period combines the ‘AND’ and ‘OR’ methods into a unique one-dimensional method (Salvadori & De Michele 2007). In general, the method allows for easy identification of endangered regions and supports multivariate drought risk analysis (Zhang et al. 2013). Therefore, in this study, the secondary return period method is employed to calculate the joint drought return period, the latter of which is used to estimate the joint hydrological design quantiles. The secondary return period is clearly a function of the critical layer associated with probability p. The joint drought return period corresponding to an endangered event calculated using the secondary return period method is denoted as follows (Salvadori et al. 2011b):
(8)
(9)
(10)
where represents the secondary return period; a represents the average inter-arrival time of the drought events; is Kendall's distribution function, and p represents the critical probability level. k represents the copulas dimension. is the generator of copulas as shown in Table 1.
According to the Sklar theory, the three-dimensional joint probability density function can be written as follows:
(11)
where is the copula probability density function. , , and are the marginal probability density functions for the drought duration, severity, and peak, respectively. The , , and can be computed based on the inverse functions of the optimal marginal distribution functions obtained in Section 3.2.
According to the conditional probability theory,
(12)
Based on the Sklar and conditional probability theories simultaneously:
(13)
(14)
Therefore, the three-dimensional Vine copulas probability density function can be written as the product of three bivariate copula probability density functions:
(15)
The copulas density function can be computed using the copula distribution function:
(16)

Based on the equations shown above, given an infinite combination of drought characteristics under a specific joint return period, the most likely design quantiles whose three-dimensional joint probability density function could be obtained. However, infinite data cannot be accessed. Here, the systematic sampling method is used to generate a series of drought characteristics for multivariate joint design quantiles estimation. The systematic sampling method extracts sample units at equal intervals. It is of simple, rapid, economical, flexible, ad convenient characteristics (Sethi 1965). Detailed steps to obtain the joint design quantiles based on systematic sampling and Vine copulas are as follows.

Step 1: Generate a cumulative probability distribution function for 1,000 groups with an equal interval of 0.001 for .

Step 2: Calculate the corresponding cumulative probability distribution function of based on the conditional probability (of the optimal bivariate copula (obtained in Section 3.3) to derive the under a given secondary return period condition. is directly calculated by p which is used to derive the secondary return period as shown in Equation (8).

Step 3: Further generate a cumulative probability distribution function for the root node with an equal interval of 0.001 under each generated condition. Gräler et al. (2013) pointed out that multivariate design quantiles need additional analysis as some design quantiles go beyond the standard in a single design event. In this study, the minimum cumulative probability distribution function for the root node is set to the univariate cumulative probability distribution probability under a given return period minus 0.01. The setting of 0.01 is referred to Table 2 in Gräler et al. 2013.

Table 2

Design quantiles calculated based on a univariate framework

Sub-basinDrought characteristicUnivariate drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 11.18 15.19 
Peak (108m31.26 1.37 
Severity (108m37.65 10.36 
BRB Duration (month) 10.06 12.01 
Peak (108m30.65 0.70 
Severity (108m33.03 3.89 
MSWRB Duration (month) 10.26 13.75 
Peak (108m35.28 5.77 
Severity (108m334.68 46.50 
Sub-basinDrought characteristicUnivariate drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 11.18 15.19 
Peak (108m31.26 1.37 
Severity (108m37.65 10.36 
BRB Duration (month) 10.06 12.01 
Peak (108m30.65 0.70 
Severity (108m33.03 3.89 
MSWRB Duration (month) 10.26 13.75 
Peak (108m35.28 5.77 
Severity (108m334.68 46.50 

Step 4: Calculate the corresponding cumulative probability distribution function of and based on the conditional probability of the optimal bivariate copula to derive the and , respectively. Optimal copula type is obtained in Section 3.3 and the calculations can be found in Equations (4) and (5) and Figure 4.

Step 5: Calculate the marginal probability density function for the drought duration , severity , and peak based on the optimal marginal distribution function derived in Section 3.2.

Step 6: Calculate the copula probability density function and the three-dimensional joint probability density function of these generated combinations based on Equations (11)–(16).

Step 7: Find the maximal three-dimensional joint probability density function relating to specific joint return periods. Determine the , , and corresponding to the maximal . And calculate the drought duration, severity, and peak values based on the inverse functions of these optimal marginal distribution functions, the procedure is the same as Equation (3). These values are the multivariate joint design quantiles of duration, severity, and peak under given joint return periods.

Estimation of the design quantiles based on a univariate framework

Based on the monthly RAP values and the theory of runs, three hydrological drought characteristics (duration, severity, and peak) for each drought event are identified and plotted in Figure 5. Figure 5 shows that the occurrence probabilities of the drought events characterized by shorter duration (especially 1-month drought events) are higher than those by longer duration. The occurrence probabilities of the 1-month duration drought events are approximately 22, 11, and 24% in the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB, respectively.
Figure 5

Plots of three hydrological drought characteristics for each drought event in the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB.

Figure 5

Plots of three hydrological drought characteristics for each drought event in the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB.

Close modal

After that, the aforementioned five marginal distribution functions are used to fit the duration, severity, and peak data. Based on the optimal parameters of each marginal distribution function, the goodness-of-fit between the empirical and theoretical cumulative probabilities are evaluated based on the RMSE values. The RMSE values indicate that in the JRB, the Exponential, Weibull, and Weibull are the most appropriate marginal distributions for the duration, peak, and severity, respectively. In the BRB, the Weibull, Weibull, and Weibull are the optimal marginal distributions for the duration, peak, and severity, respectively. In the MSWRB, the Exponential, Weibull, and Exponential distributions are optimal for the duration, peak, and severity, respectively.

Using the inverse functions of these optimal marginal distribution functions, the design quantiles can be estimated using traditional univariate drought return period analysis, i.e., using Equations (2) and (3). As Wang et al. (2019) pointed out, a basin's drought resistance capacity (representing the capacity to meet the water demand) is weak downstream of the Yellow River when the joint return period is about 6 years. As data period 1956–2015 utilized in this study and 1960–2013 data in Wang et al. (2019) is basically same, and the study area is of similarity (Wei River is the largest tributary of the Yellow River), in this study, authors focus on two drought return periods of approximately 6 years (5-year and 10-year) for further design quantiles analysis. The design quantiles of the duration, peak, and severity estimated using univariate drought return period analysis under these two drought return periods are shown in Table 2.

Estimation of the joint design quantiles based on a multivariate framework

First, Kendall's tau correlation coefficients are calculated to determine the root node in the first tree (Table 3). Table 3 shows that the maximum sum of Kendall's tau with the two other variables corresponds to the duration, severity, and severity in the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB, respectively. Therefore, duration, severity, and severity are chosen as the root nodes for the JRB, BRB, and MSWRB, respectively.

Table 3

Kendall's correlation coefficient tau values for the three drought characteristics

Sub-basinDrought characteristicsDurationPeakSeverity
JRB Duration  0.6696 0.9261 1.5957 
Peak 0.6696  0.6552 1.3248 
Severity 0.9261 0.6552  1.5813 
BRB Duration  0.7198 0.9741 1.6939 
Peak 0.7198  0.7553 1.4751 
Severity 0.9741 0.7553  1.7294 
MSWRB Duration  0.6078 0.9442 1.5520 
Peak 0.6078  0.6469 1.2547 
Severity 0.9442 0.6469  1.5911 
Sub-basinDrought characteristicsDurationPeakSeverity
JRB Duration  0.6696 0.9261 1.5957 
Peak 0.6696  0.6552 1.3248 
Severity 0.9261 0.6552  1.5813 
BRB Duration  0.7198 0.9741 1.6939 
Peak 0.7198  0.7553 1.4751 
Severity 0.9741 0.7553  1.7294 
MSWRB Duration  0.6078 0.9442 1.5520 
Peak 0.6078  0.6469 1.2547 
Severity 0.9442 0.6469  1.5911 

Next, the three bivariate copulas are employed to derive the joint distributions of the three drought characteristics. The goodness-of-fit results for the joint empirical and theoretical cumulative probabilities are shown in Figure 6. Results show that Frank, Frank, and Gumbel are the optimal bivariate copulas to derive the joint distribution of and in Tree 1 and in Tree 2 for the JRB. Similarly, Clayton, and Frank are the optimal bivariate copulas for the BRB. Gumbel, Clayton, and Frank are selected for the MSWRB.
Figure 6

Goodness-of-fit results for the joint empirical and theoretical probabilities derived using the three bivariate copula functions.

Figure 6

Goodness-of-fit results for the joint empirical and theoretical probabilities derived using the three bivariate copula functions.

Close modal
After determining three optimal bivariate copulas, based on detailed steps in Section 3.4, the combinations of generated samples under joint return periods of 5 years and 10 years are chosen and plotted in Figure 7. Because all the combinations have the same joint drought return period, it is important to determine which combination of the three drought characteristics under a given return period is most likely. Using the methods demonstrated in Section 3.4, the most likely joint design quantiles under the secondary return periods of 5 and 10 years are obtained (Table 4).
Table 4

Most likely design quantiles calculated based on a multivariate framework solved by Vine copulas

Sub-basinDrought characteristicJoint drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 8.03 9.94 
Peak (108m31.38 1.49 
Severity (108m39.97 13.16 
BRB Duration (month) 13.39 15.31 
Peak (108m30.69 0.74 
Severity (108m32.36 2.84 
MSWRB Duration (month) 17.72 22.00 
Peak (108m35.72 6.29 
Severity (108m324.33 30.21 
Sub-basinDrought characteristicJoint drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 8.03 9.94 
Peak (108m31.38 1.49 
Severity (108m39.97 13.16 
BRB Duration (month) 13.39 15.31 
Peak (108m30.69 0.74 
Severity (108m32.36 2.84 
MSWRB Duration (month) 17.72 22.00 
Peak (108m35.72 6.29 
Severity (108m324.33 30.21 
Figure 7

Sampling results for the three drought characteristics under two joint return period conditions.

Figure 7

Sampling results for the three drought characteristics under two joint return period conditions.

Close modal

Results analysis

The government of China has realized that current water conservancy projects are inadequate. Repairing existing infrastructure and initiating new projects is essential (Liu et al. 2013). In 2011, China issued the Central Document No. 1, focusing on accelerating and reforming water conservancy. In September of 2014, the Ministry of Water Resources, National Development and Reform Commission, Ministry of Finance, and Ministry of Agriculture issued the National Drought Relief Implementation Plan (2014–2016). Different types of drought relief emergency resources, such as reservoirs, water diversion projects, rubber dams, wells, and water cellars, were proposed and constructed in China to regulate water resources and mitigate the serious issue of water shortage (Liu et al. 2013; Li et al. 2018).

This study aims to compare the design quantiles calculated by univariate and multivariate frameworks for reliable drought relief project design. Besides the univariate design quantiles in Table 2 and multivariate design quantiles solved by Vine copulas in Table 4, the most likely design quantiles based on the multivariate framework solved by three-dimensional Archimedean copulas (Table 5) are also calculated for better contrastive analysis.

Table 5

Most likely design quantiles calculated based on a multivariate framework solved by three-dimensional Archimedean copulas

Sub-basinDrought characteristicJoint drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 7.35 9.35 
Peak (108m31.18 1.25 
Severity (108m35.07 6.44 
BRB Duration (month) 8.50 9.67 
Peak (108m30.61 0.65 
Severity (108m32.27 2.75 
MSWRB Duration (month) 9.67 13.71 
Peak (108m35.35 5.89 
Severity (108m332.73 46.10 
Sub-basinDrought characteristicJoint drought return period (year)
510
JRB Duration (month) 7.35 9.35 
Peak (108m31.18 1.25 
Severity (108m35.07 6.44 
BRB Duration (month) 8.50 9.67 
Peak (108m30.61 0.65 
Severity (108m32.27 2.75 
MSWRB Duration (month) 9.67 13.71 
Peak (108m35.35 5.89 
Severity (108m332.73 46.10 

In practical drought relief project design, the total water shortage (which is correlated with drought severity) is the most important parameter used to determine the scale of the project. By comparing the design quantiles estimated via univariate drought return period analysis (Table 2) with the design quantiles estimated via multivariate joint return period analysis solved by Vine copulas (Table 4) and that solved by three-dimensional Archimedean copulas (Table 5), results show that under 5-year and 10-year drought return periods, severity design quantile (directly affecting the project scale) estimated by Vine copulas in the WRB considering three sub-basins is smaller than that by the univariate framework and that by three-dimensional Archimedean copulas. Possible reasons are as follows.

The univariate analysis only considers limited characteristics of the drought events rather than the complicated relationship. It may result in overestimation or underestimation of the results also pointed out by Shiau et al. (2006), Das et al. (2020), Fan et al. (2021), and Nguyen-Huy et al. (2022).

The three-dimensional copulas use one parameter to describe the relationship among multiple characteristics. Parameter estimation is relatively simple. However, this method restricts the consistency of correlation structure among variables, which may lead to insufficient correlation description among multiple elements (Kurowicka & Cooke 2006; Bedford et al. 2015). This method may be difficult to reflect the complex structure among the variables (Kurowicka & Cooke 2006; Bedford et al. 2015). It may further result in the design quantiles of three-dimensional copulas different from those derived by the univariate method, similar to the findings of Chen et al. (2018) and Shang et al. (2022).

Vine copulas decompose high-dimensional copulas into multiple bivariate copulas. It deals with the problems of high-dimensional data by reducing dimension (Pereira et al. 2017). In addition, the bivariate correlation structure is not limited. Vine copulas is more flexible than Archimedean copulas (Aas et al. 2009; Brechmann & Schepsmeier 2013). The result based on this method is more consistent with the inherent law of hydrological phenomena and can better reflect the correlation among various characteristics (Radfar et al. 2022). This method might lead to the design quantiles of severity in the WRB considering three sub-basins lower than that calculated by a univariate framework similar to the smaller design quantile of flood volume pointed out by Huang & Chen (2015).

The above results show that in traditional univariate drought return period analysis, the relationships among the three drought characteristics are not considered. Using Vine copulas provides a more comprehensive and reliable reference for drought return period analysis and design quantiles analysis. The finding that the drought severity design quantiles in the WRB calculated by three-dimensional Archimedean copulas and univariate drought return period analysis are larger than those calculated by Vine copulas indicates that future drought relief projects should be designed to have a larger total storage capacity, which is related to the water supply capacity, to reduce the water shortage and better resist drought. While drought resistance is better, higher water supply capacity will result in a larger project scale and inevitably the increase of the project investment. Further, high depreciation costs are associated with large, expensive infrastructure. For the case study area, WRB, from the characteristic's simulation of drought events perspective, the authors state that using the design quantiles calculated by Vine copulas might be more reliable to provide a basis for the construction of drought relief projects. Vine copulas calculation results not only consider the relationship among multiple variables but also achieve a balance between economic input reduction and project safety standard maintenance. This method provides a new way to estimate the drought relief project scale and provides a basis for water resources management decision-making.

It is worth noting that the most likely design quantiles may not be the most severe combinations relating to a specific return period (Sadegh et al. 2018). Relating to a given return period, all possible combinations constitute an isosurface. The design quantiles determined by multivariate framework provide a reference for engineering design. This study can be considered as a typical case study for its application in hydraulic engineering. In the process of design quantiles calculation, there are many uncertainties (detailed discussions shown in Section 5.2: Limitations and potential future work), which may lead to the deviation of the results. The authors state that the influence of various uncertainties on the design quantiles should be analyzed comprehensively in the future. By considering various uncertainties, inherent laws of hydrologic events (Volpi & Fiori 2012), project investment and other restrictive factors, the most appropriate design quantiles should be calculated scientifically and reasonably by comparing and verifying through various methods. This needs to be enhanced urgently and is our future research focus.

Limitations and potential future work

This study focuses on the design of hydrological infrastructure to alleviate drought. The authors assess the total storage capacity (corresponding to the water supply capacity) of the drought relief project design. Methodology in Section 3 is universal. The methodology can be applied to other regions and to various types of drought. However, the authors acknowledge that this study has several limitations.

First, in this study, the authors focus on surface water. It is also necessary to consider other water resources, such as groundwater, recycled wastewater, and transferred water, in our analysis. It is also necessary to consider other types of projects, such as those meant to increase the accuracy of drought forecasting, establish a drought-resistant decision system, and develop water-saving integrated technology.

Furthermore, this study assumes the marginal distribution function of each drought characteristic does not change during the whole data period. It means that this study assumes the data are stationary. However, with the impact of climate change and human activities, the hydrological sequence has changed (Serinaldi & Kilsby 2015). Without considering the nonstationarity may lead to the deviation and uncertainty of the results (Tootoonchi et al. 2021). Nonstationarity is not considered in this study for the following reason. The change point of the WRB is basically around 1995 (Yang et al. 2020). Considering the nonstationarity will result in the short data period before and after the change point. Shorter data are less representative of the population. This also leads to larger uncertainty and further affects management decision-making (Tong et al. 2015; Sadegh et al. 2018). If longer data are available, it is of great importance to estimate the design quantiles considering the nonstationarity under the changing environment.

Besides the nonstationarity uncertainty, multivariate design quantiles also face other uncertainties. For example, the uncertainty of univariate marginal distribution function parameter fitting (Xu et al. 2009; Sadegh et al. 2018), the uncertainty of the parameter estimation and type of the copulas (Zhang et al. 2015; Sadegh et al. 2018), uncertainty of sampling (Dung et al. 2015). Further research should focus on evaluating these uncertainties quantitatively and consider them reasonably in engineering design.

Drought causes significant economic loss worldwide. The construction of drought relief projects is an effective way to mitigate the impacts of drought. In this study, design quantiles of the water supply capacity (the key factor affecting the project scale) are estimated using return period analysis. Larger-scale projects require a large economic input, while at a smaller scale, it is difficult to reduce the water shortage. A proper return period calculation is essential for better project design. In traditional drought return period analysis, only a univariate variable-drought severity (which quantifies the magnitude of the total water shortage without considering other drought characteristics) is considered. Joint return period analysis better reflects the complex relationships among the different drought characteristics. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is to estimate the joint design quantiles of the drought characteristics using multivariate joint return period analysis for reliable design policy-making.

This study proposes a framework to achieve this goal. The first step is to generate the first conditional cumulative distribution function in Tree 2 of Vine copulas. Then, the second conditional cumulative distribution function in Tree 2 is calculated based on conditional probability. Next is to further generate the cumulative probability distribution function for the root node drought characteristic. The fourth step is to calculate the cumulative probability distribution functions of the other two characteristics still based on the conditional probability. The fifth and sixth steps are to calculate the marginal probability density functions of three characteristics, the copula probability density function and the three-dimensional joint probability density function. The final step is to find the most likely design quantiles relating to a specific return period.

The WRB (divided into three sub-basins) is chosen as the case study area to demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed framework. The results show that the design quantiles of the three drought characteristics calculated using univariate drought return period analysis are larger than those calculated using joint drought return period analysis by Vine copulas. Infrastructure designed using univariate drought return period analysis has a high total storage capacity but is expensive to build. In future drought relief project design, joint drought return period analysis calculated by Vine copulas should be employed to reduce the economic input into projects intended for drought relief while maintaining the project safety standard in the WRB.

Although the WRB is selected as the study area, our framework is highly transferable to other river basins. In addition, the proposed framework can be extended to n dimensions (n 3), allowing for n-dimensional joint design quantiles analysis using a Vine copula structure that incorporates more than three event characteristics. Overall, our work increases the applicability of multivariate joint design quantiles analysis, which brings new sights for determining the project scale in drought-prone regions. However, in the future, more uncertainties (such as nonstationarity, parameter fitting, copulas type, and sampling uncertainty) should be involved. And a multi-method comparison pattern could better determine the appropriate design quantiles considering uncertainties, inherent laws, investment, and other restrictive factors that may influence design quantiles. These would be our objectives for future work.

This study is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (52209030) and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (GK202207005). The authors thank the editors and reviewers for their helpful comments.

All relevant data are included in the paper or its Supplementary Information.

The authors declare there is no conflict.

Aas
K.
,
Czado
C.
,
Frigessi
A.
&
Bakken
H.
2009
Pair-copula constructions of multiple dependence
.
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics
44
(
2
),
182
198
.
Ballarin
A. S.
,
Barros
G. L.
&
Cabrera
M. C. M.
2021
A copula-based drought assessment framework considering global simulation models
.
Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies
38
,
100970
.
Bedford
T.
&
Cooke
R.
2001
Probability density decomposition for conditionally dependent random variables modeled by vines
.
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
32
(
1
),
245
268
.
Bedford
T.
,
Daneshkhah
A.
&
Wilson
K. J.
2015
Approximate uncertainty modeling in risk analysis with vine copulas
.
Risk Analysis
36
(
4
),
792
815
.
Bhatti
M. I.
&
Do
H. Q.
2019
Recent development in copula and its applications to the energy, forestry, and environmental sciences
.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy
44
,
19453
19473
.
Brechmann
E. C.
&
Schepsmeier
U.
2013
Modeling dependence with C- and D-Vine Copulas: the R package CDVine
.
Journal of Statistical Software
52
(
3
),
1
27
.
Brechmann
E. C.
,
Czado
C.
&
Aas
K.
2012
Truncated regular vines in high dimensions with applications to financial data
.
Canadian Journal of Statistics
40
(
1
),
68
85
.
Chen
Z.
,
Liu
Z.
&
Zhao
Q.
2018
Comparative analysis on four recurrence levels of joint distribution of flood peak discharge and volume
.
Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni
57
(
1
), 130–135.
(in Chinese)
Corbella
S.
&
Stretch
D. D.
2012
Multivariate return periods of sea storms for coastal erosion risk assessment
.
Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences
12
(
8
),
2699
2708
.
De Michele
C.
,
Salvadori
G.
,
Passoni
G.
&
Vezzoli
R.
2007
A multivariate model of sea storms using copulas
.
Coastal Engineering
54
(
10
),
734
751
.
Dodangeh
E.
,
Shahedi
K.
,
Shiau
J. T.
&
MirAkbari
M.
2017
Spatial hydrological drought characteristics in Karkheh River basin, southwest Iran using copulas
.
Journal of Earth System Science
126
(
6
),
80
.
Fredricks
G. A.
&
Nelsen
R. B.
2007
On the relationship between Spearman's rho and Kendall's tau for pairs of continuous random variables
.
Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference
137
(
7
),
2143
2150
.
Gräler
B.
,
van den Berg
M.
,
Vandenberghe
S.
,
Petroselli
A.
,
Grimaldi
S.
,
De Baets
B.
&
Verhoest
N.
2013
Multivariate return periods in hydrology: a critical and practical review focusing on synthetic design hydrograph estimation
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
17
(
4
),
1281
1296
.
Grimaldi
S.
&
Serinaldi
F.
2006
Asymmetric copula in multivariate flood frequency analysis
.
Advances in Water Resources
29
(
8
),
1155
1167
.
Gringorten
I. I.
1963
A plotting rule for extreme probability paper
.
Journal of Geophysical Research
68
(
3
),
813
814
.
Hateren
T. C. V.
,
Sutanto
S. J.
&
Lanen
H. A. J. V.
2019
Evaluating skill and robustness of seasonal meteorological and hydrological drought forecasts at the catchment scale – case Catalonia (Spain)
.
Environment International
133
, 105206.
Heim
R. R.
Jr.
2002
A review of twentieth-century drought indices used in the United States
.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
83
(
8
),
1149
.
Hou
W.
,
Chen
Z.
,
Zuo
D.
&
Feng
G.
2019
Drought loss assessment model for southwest China based on a hyperbolic tangent function
.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
33
,
477
484
.
Hu
Z.
,
Wu
Z.
,
Islam
A. R. M. T.
,
You
X.
,
Liu
C.
,
Li
Q.
&
Zhang
X.
2021
Spatiotemporal characteristics and risk assessment of agricultural drought disasters during the winter wheat-growing season on the Huang-Huai-Hai Plain, China
.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology
143
,
1393
1407
.
Huang
Q.
&
Chen
Z.
2015
Multivariate flood risk assessment based on the secondary return period
.
Journal of Lakes Sciences
27
(
2
),
352
360
.
(in Chinese)
.
Kao
S. C.
&
Govindaraju
R. S.
2007
A bivariate frequency analysis of extreme rainfall with implications for design
.
Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres
112
,
D13
.
Keyantash
J.
&
Dracup
J. A.
2002
The quantification of drought: an evaluation of drought indices
.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society
83
(
8
),
1167
1180
.
Kurowicka
D.
&
Cooke
R.
2006
Uncertainty Analysis with High Dimensional Dependence Modeling
.
John Wiley
, Chichester.
Li
S.
,
Bush
R. T.
,
Santos
I.
,
Zhang
Q.
,
Song
K.
,
Mao
R.
,
Wen
Z.
&
Lu
X. X.
2018
Large greenhouse gases emissions from China's lakes and reservoirs
.
Water Research
147
,
13
24
.
Liu
J.
,
Zang
C.
,
Tian
S.
,
Liu
J.
,
Yang
H.
,
Jia
S.
,
You
L.
,
Liu
B.
&
Zhang
M.
2013
Water conservancy projects in China: achievements, challenges and way forward
.
Global Environmental Change
23
(
3
),
633
643
.
T.
,
Tang
X.
,
Li
D.
&
Qi
X.
2020
Modelling multivariate distribution of multiple soil parameters using vine copula model
.
Computers and Geotechnics
118
, 103340.
Mishra
A. K.
&
Singh
V. P.
2010
A review of drought concepts
.
Journal of Hydrology
391
(
1–2
),
202
216
.
Mohammed
U. D.
,
Legesse
S. A.
,
Berlie
A. B.
&
Ehsan
M. A.
2022
Climate change repercussions on meteorological drought frequency and intensity in South Wollo, Ethiopia
.
Earth Systems and Environment
6
,
645
655
.
Montes-Iturrizaga
R.
&
Heredia-Zavoni
E.
2016
Multivariate environmental contours using C-Vine copulas
.
Ocean Engineering
118
,
68
82
.
Nelsen
R. B.
2006
An Introduction to Copulas
, 2nd edn.
Springer
,
New York
.
Lecture Notes in Statistics
.
Nguyen-Huy
T.
,
Deo
R. C.
,
An-Vo
D.
,
Mushtaq
S.
&
Khan
S.
2017
Copula-statistical precipitation forecasting model in Australia's agro-ecological zones
.
Agricultural Water Management
191
,
153
172
.
Nguyen-Huy
T.
,
Kath
J.
,
Nagler
T.
,
Khaung
Y.
,
Aung
T. S. S.
,
Mushtaq
S.
,
Marcussen
T.
&
Stone
R.
2022
A satellite-based Standardized Antecedent Precipitation Index (SAPI) for mapping extreme rainfall risk in Myanmar
.
Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment
26
,
100733
.
Pereira
G. A. A.
,
Veiga
A.
,
Erhardt
T.
&
Czado
C.
2017
A periodic spatial vine copula model for multi-site streamflow simulation
.
Electric Power Systems Research
152
,
9
17
.
Rad
A. M.
,
Ghahraman
B.
,
Khalili
D.
,
Ghahremani
Z.
&
Ardakani
S. A.
2017
Integrated meteorological and hydrological drought model: a management tool for proactive water resources planning of semi-arid regions
.
Advances in Water Resources
107
,
336
353
.
Radfar
S.
,
Shafieefar
M.
&
Akbari
H.
2022
Impact of copula model selection on reliability-based design optimization of a rubble mound breakwater
.
Ocean Engineering
260
(
15
),
112023
.
Rojas
O.
2018
Agricultural extreme drought assessment at global level using the FAO-Agricultural Stress Index System (ASIS)
.
Weather and Climate Extremes
27
,
100184
.
Sadegh
M.
,
Moftakhari
H.
,
Gupta
H. V.
,
Ragno
E.
,
Mazdiyasni
O.
,
Sanders
B.
,
Matthew
R.
&
AghaKouchak
A.
2018
Multihazard scenarios for analysis of compound extreme events
.
Geographysical Research Letters
45
,
5470
5480
.
Salvadori
G.
2004
Bivariate return periods via 2-copulas
.
Statistical Methodology
1
(
1–2
),
129
144
.
Salvadori
G.
&
De Michele
C.
2007
On the use of copulas in hydrology: theory and practice
.
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
12
(
4
),
369
380
.
Salvadori
G.
,
De Michele
C.
&
Durante
F.
2011a
Multivariate design via Copulas
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions
8
,
5523
5558
.
Salvadori
G.
,
Durante
F.
&
De Michele
C.
2011b
On the return period and design in a multivariate framework
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences
15
,
3293
3305
.
Serinaldi
F.
&
Kilsby
C. G.
2015
Stationarity is undead: uncertainty dominates the distribution of extremes
.
Advances in Water Resources
77
,
17
36
.
Sethi
V. K.
1965
On optimum pairing of units
.
Sankhya B
27
,
315
320
.
Shang
X.
,
Wang
D.
,
Zeng
X.
&
Wang
Y.
2022
Risk analysis of multi-dimensional joint design flood considering the randomness of flood process
.
Journal of Nanjing University (Natural Science)
58
(
4
), 730–739.
(in Chinese)
Shiau
J. T.
2006
Fitting drought duration and severity with two-dimensional copulas
.
Water Resources Management
20
(
5
),
795
815
.
Shiau
J. T.
,
Wang
H. Y.
&
Tsai
C. T.
2006
Bivariate frequency analysis of floods using copulas
.
Journal of the American Water Resources Association
42
(
6
),
1549
1564
.
Shiau
J. T.
,
Feng
S.
&
Nadarajah
S.
2007
Assessment of hydrological droughts for the Yellow River, China, using copulas
.
Hydrological Processes
21
(
16
),
2157
2163
.
Tenagashaw
D. Y.
,
Muluneh
M.
,
Metaferia
G.
&
Mekonnen
Y. A.
2022
Land use and climate change impacts on streamflow using SWAT model, middle Awash Sub Basin, Ethiopia
.
Water Conservation Science and Engineering
7
,
183
196
.
Tong
X.
,
Wang
D.
,
Singh
V. P.
,
Asce
F.
,
Wu
J. C.
,
Chen
X.
&
Chen
Y. F.
2015
Impact of data length on the uncertainty of hydrological copula modeling
.
Journal of Hydrologic Engineering
20
(
4
), 05014019.
Tootoonchi
F.
,
Sadegh
M.
,
Haerter
J. O.
,
Räty
O.
,
Grabs
T.
&
Teutschbein
C.
2021
Copulas for hydroclimatic analysis: a practice-oriented overview
.
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water
9
,
e1579
.
Vandenberghe
S.
,
van den Berg
M. J.
,
Gräler
B.
,
Petroselli
A.
,
Grimaldi
S.
,
Baets
B. D.
&
Verhoest
N. E. C.
2012
Joint return periods in hydrology: a critical and practical review focusing on synthetic design hydrograph estimation
.
Hydrology and Earth System Sciences Discussions
9
,
6781
6828
.
Volpi
E.
&
Fiori
A.
2012
Design event selection in bivariate hydrological frequency analysis
.
Hydrological Sciences Journal
57
(
8
),
1506
1515
.
Wang
Y.
,
Yang
J.
,
Chang
J.
&
Zhang
R.
2019
Assessing the drought mitigation ability of the reservoir in the downstream of the Yellow River
.
Science of the Total Environment
646
,
1327
1335
.
Wilhite
D. A.
2000
Drought: A Global Assessment
.
Routledge
, London.
Wu
J.
,
Chen
X.
,
Yu
Z.
,
Yao
H.
&
Zhang
D.
2019
Assessing the impact of human regulations on hydrological drought development and recovery based on a ‘simulated-observed’ comparison of the SWAT model
.
Journal of Hydrology
577
, 123990.
Xu
Y.
,
Booji
M. J.
&
Tong
Y.
2009
Uncertainty analysis in statistical modeling of extreme hydrological events
.
Stochastic Environmental Research and Risk Assessment
24
,
567
578
.
Yang
J.
,
Chang
J.
,
Wang
Y.
,
Li
Y.
,
Hu
H.
,
Chen
Y.
,
Huang
Q.
&
Yao
J.
2018
Comprehensive drought characteristics analysis based on a nonlinear multivariate drought index
.
Journal of Hydrology
557
,
651
667
.
Yang
J.
,
Yang
Y. C. E.
,
Chang
J.
,
Zhang
J.
&
Yao
J.
2019
Impact of dam development and climate change on hydroecological conditions and natural hazard risk in the Mekong River Basin
.
Journal of Hydrology
579
, 124177.
Yang
J.
,
Wang
Y.
,
Yao
J.
,
Chang
J.
,
Xu
G.
,
Wang
X.
&
Hu
H.
2020
Coincidence probability analysis of hydrologic low-flow under the changing environment in the Wei River Basin
.
Natural Hazards
103
,
1711
1726
.
Zhang
Q.
,
Xiao
M.
,
Singh
V. P.
&
Chen
X.
2013
Copula-based risk evaluation of droughts across the Pearl River basin, China
.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology
111
(
1–2
),
119
131
.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits copying and redistribution for non-commercial purposes with no derivatives, provided the original work is properly cited (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).