Abstract
Abstract. We present a new method to derive the empirical (i.e., data-based) elasticity of streamflow to precipitation and potential evaporation. This method, which uses long-term hydrometeorological records, is tested on a set of 519 French catchments. We compare a total of five different ways to compute elasticity: the reference method first proposed by Sankarasubramanian et al. (2001) and four alternatives differing in the type of regression model chosen (OLS or GLS, univariate or bivariate). We show that the bivariate GLS and OLS regressions provide the most robust solution, because they account for the co-variation of precipitation and potential evaporation anomalies. We also compare empirical elasticity estimates with theoretical estimates derived analytically from the Turc–Mezentsev formula. Empirical elasticity offers a powerful means to test the extrapolation capacity of those hydrological models that are to be used to predict the impact of climatic changes.
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Engineering,General Environmental Science
Reference33 articles.
1. Allen, R., Pereira, L., Raes, D., and Smith, M.: Crop evapotranspiration – Guidelines for computing crop water requirements, FAO, Rome, FAO Irrigation and Drainage paper 56, 100 pp., 1998.
2. Arora, V. K.: The use of the aridity index to assess climate change effect on annual runoff, J. Hydrol., 265, 164–177, 2002.
3. Banque Hydro portal: Hydrometric data, available at: http://www.hydro.eaufrance.fr/, last access: 30 September 2016.
4. Chiew, F.: Estimation of rainfall elasticity of streamflow in Australia, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 51, 613–625, 2006.
5. Chiew, F., Potter, N. J., Vaze, J., Petheram, C., Zhang, L., Teng, J., and Post, D. A.: Observed hydrologic non-stationarity in far south-eastern Australia: implications for modelling and prediction, Stoch. Env. Res. Risk A., 28, 3–15, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-013-0755-5, 2013.
Cited by
41 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献