RESEARCH ARTICLE
10.1029/2021EF002456
Key Points:
• Analysis of recent droughts shows that
drought diagnosis is often insufficient
leading to unsuccessful strategies to
deal with drought
• Drought diagnosis can be improved
by using an analogy with the medical
diagnostic process
• This emphasizes that the focus of a
comprehensive drought diagnosis
should be to prescribe treatment that
reduces drought impacts
Supporting Information:
Supporting Information may be found in
the online version of this article.
Correspondence to:
D. W. Walker,
[email protected]
Citation:
Walker, D. W., Cavalcante, L., Kchouk,
S., Ribeiro Neto, G. G., Dewulf,
A., Gondim, R. S., et al. (2022).
Drought diagnosis: What the medical
sciences can teach us. Earth's Future,
10, e2021EF002456. https://doi.
org/10.1029/2021EF002456
Received 24 SEP 2021
Accepted 26 JAN 2022
Drought Diagnosis: What the Medical Sciences Can Teach Us
David W. Walker1 , Louise Cavalcante2 , Sarra Kchouk1 , Germano G. Ribeiro Neto3
Art Dewulf2 , Rubens S. Gondim4 , Eduardo S. Passos Rodrigues Martins5,6 ,
Lieke A. Melsen3 , Francisco de Assis de Souza Filho6 , Noemi Vergopolan7,8 , and
Pieter R. Van Oel1
,
1
Water Resources Management Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2Public Administration and
Policy Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 3Hydrology and Quantitative Water Management
Group, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 4Embrapa Agroindústria Tropical, Fortaleza, Brazil,
5
Fundação Cearense de Meteorologia e Recursos Hídricos (FUNCEME), Fortaleza, Brazil, 6Department of Hydraulic
and Environmental Engineering, Federal University of Ceará (UFC), Fortaleza, Brazil, 7Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences
Program, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA, 8NOAA Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory, Princeton, NJ, USA
Abstract Drought management is currently informed by a variety of approaches, mostly responding to
drought crisis when it happens. Toward more effective and integrated drought management, we introduce a
conceptual drought diagnosis framework inspired by diagnostic concepts from the field of medicine. This
framework comprises five steps: 1. Initial diagnostic assessment; 2. Diagnostic testing; 3. Consultation; 4.
Communication of the diagnosis; and 5. Treatment and prognosis. To illustrate the need for the proposed
approach, four case studies of recently drought-affected regions were selected: the city of Cape Town, the
state of California, the Northeast region of Brazil, and the Horn of Africa. Contrasting elements for these
cases include the geographic extent and political boundaries, climate, socio-economics, and the relevance of
different water resources (e.g., rainfall, reservoirs, and aquifers). For each case, we identified documented
practices and policies and reflected on them in terms of drought misdiagnosis or incomplete diagnosis that
have aggravated socio-economic and environmental drought impacts. A common example is the preference for
technical solutions (e.g., installing infrastructure to augment water supply), rather than measures that reduce
vulnerability. Analysis of these four drought case studies confirmed the anticipated need for a comprehensive
approach to drought diagnosis for more successful treatment and prevention of drought. Using an analogy
with medical science can be helpful toward comprehensively diagnosing droughts for a variety of contexts and
assessing the effectiveness of proposed interventions. This framework can help drought managers to be more
proactive in enabling drought-affected regions to become more drought resilient in the future.
Plain Language Summary Droughts are becoming more common around the world, are occurring
in new areas, lasting longer, and are affecting more people. When drought hits, we often experience water
shortages, which can affect agriculture leading to food shortages. Additional drought impacts on health,
lifestyle, and ecosystems include drying rivers and lakes, dust storms, water use restrictions, a lack of snow,
dying forests, and wildfires. In extreme cases, droughts cause famine, disease, and migration. The fact that such
drought impacts regularly make the news shows how ineffectively we currently manage drought; because the
common practice is to respond to drought crisis as it happens rather than preparing in advance. Considering
drought as a health disorder, we can follow the process used in medicine to diagnose that disorder and prescribe
treatment. We suggest using this approach would enable us to identify where and how a location is vulnerable
to drought and work on treatments. We could improve the health of a location before drought hits, thus reducing
drought impacts. We discuss four recent drought cases: the city of Cape Town, state of California, Northeast
region of Brazil, and Horn of Africa, to illustrate how drought could be better dealt with using our proposed
approach.
© 2022 The Authors. Earth's Future
published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on
behalf of American Geophysical Union.
This is an open access article under
the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License, which permits use,
distribution and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is
properly cited.
WALKER ET AL.
1. Introduction
Studies often talk of “diagnosing” drought, a term inspired by medical science that is suggestive of analysis of
symptoms and causes leading to a thorough understanding of an illness or disorder to enable treatment. After
all, drought is akin to a chronic and complex disorder for which we wish to lessen symptoms and ideally prevent
altogether. However, we show that there is no consensus as to what a “drought diagnosis” entails, neither across
nor within disciplines. Yet the medical science literature provides us with the steps of the diagnostic process,
1 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
exchanging the disorder for the drought and the patient for the region of interest, that would deliver a comprehensive, collaborative, and contextualized assessment to enable us to develop a treatment plan. We propose that this
diagnostic approach, inspired by medicine and explained in Section 2, could be utilized to improve treatment of
drought and to generally improve the health of a region to prevent drought or render it less impactful.
Drought affects around 100 million people every month (Smirnov et al., 2016) and this number is increasing: The
changing climate means droughts are increasing in frequency, severity, and duration, and are occurring in previously unaffected areas (IPCC, 2021), for example, due to reduced snowfall (Huning & AghaKouchak, 2020),
increased temperature (Bloomfield et al., 2019), or changed rainfall regimes (Feng et al., 2013). Studies of future
climate predict more abundant meteorological droughts globally (Spinoni et al., 2020), while the risk of hydrological and agricultural droughts will increase due to increased temperatures (Sheffield & Wood, 2008). These
climatic drought drivers are compounded by anthropogenic drivers. Water use and demand are increasing due
to population and economic growth (Boretti & Rosa, 2019). What's more, population growth rates are highest in
semi-arid drought-affected regions, such as the Sahel, the Horn of Africa, and Central Asia (World Bank, 2021a).
Finally, water resources are declining due to human interventions such as over-abstraction, land use change, contamination, and construction of water infrastructure (Boretti & Rosa, 2019).
Identifying natural and human drivers of drought is a major scientific challenge (Van Loon et al., 2016). Nevertheless, dealing with drought requires identifying how humans induce and modify exposure and vulnerability
to drought. Rather than aggravate drought, human actions can also alleviate drought and its impacts. Exposure
and vulnerability are used in this context according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
definitions: Exposure is “the presence of people, livelihoods, species or ecosystems, environmental functions,
services, and resources, infrastructure, or economic, social, or cultural assets in places and settings that could be
adversely affected”; Vulnerability is “the propensity or predisposition to be adversely affected… [encompassing]
sensitivity or susceptibility to harm and lack of capacity to cope and adapt” (IPCC, 2014).
Global maps of drought risk by Carrão et al. (2016) and Meza et al. (2020) showed that drought risk correlates
more strongly with exposure than with drought as a hazard (hazard being the severity and frequency of drought
assessed by analyzing historical precipitation, streamflow, and evapotranspiration). Additionally, the countries
with the greatest drought risk were those with the highest vulnerability. In other words, it is the human rather than
the climatic factors that are putting livelihoods most at risk of drought.
Many recent studies have called for greater focus on human aspects of drought, in recognition that this natural
hazard is intertwined with human influences on the water cycle and feedbacks of society on drought (e.g., Haile
et al., 2020; Van Loon et al., 2016; Wanders & Wada, 2015). Indeed, a new term, anthropogenic drought, was
proposed by AghaKouchak et al. (2021) to encourage consideration that drought is not a product but rather a
process with which there are continuous feedback relationships with human activities and environmental impacts
beyond the spatiotemporal range of the drought itself. The frequency at which drought impacts make the news
around the world indicates that we need to better diagnose this process and these relationships to prevent drought
or mitigate its impacts.
There are frequent calls to improve the current ineffectiveness of drought management practices by focusing
on the underlying causes of drought rather than the more common reactive practice of crisis management (e.g.,
FAO, 2019; Wilhite et al., 2014; Wilhite & Pulwarty, 2005). We will go further and state that there is a need for
more comprehensive, collaborative, and contextualized assessment of drought that identifies and evaluates all the
causes and exacerbating factors, both natural and anthropogenic, unique to the region of interest. Such holistic
assessment is necessarily interdisciplinary because cross-sectoral drought decision-making must consider the
natural, engineered, governance, socio-economic, agricultural, industrial, energy and transportation characteristics that make a region susceptible to drought. Guidance literature from the Integrated Drought Management
Program (IDMP) and others has for many years urged a shift from crisis management to risk management, from
costly, ineffective, poorly coordinated, poorly targeted reactive “solutions” to investment in building resilience
by addressing the root causes of vulnerability (e.g., IDMP, 2014; IDMP et al., 2017; Wilhite, 2000). Yet, when
Hagenlocher et al. (2019) reviewed drought risk assessments, they found that a small minority of studies considered more than a single dimension of vulnerability (e.g., 83% focused on social dimensions alone) with few
integrating dimensions (e.g., physical, economic, or governance), and less than 40% considered any types of
solutions. Another review of drought risk assessments by Blauhut (2020) similarly showed that impacts were
WALKER ET AL.
2 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
analyzed dominantly with a specific thematic focus, for example, 60% considered only agricultural impacts—and
75% of those were analysis of impacts on a specific crop.
There are numerous examples in the literature of water and drought mismanagement that led to inadequate address or even aggravation of drought impacts. We will illustrate how insufficiently applying the diagnosis procedure leads to a misdiagnosis, generally resulting from an overly narrow understanding of the drought threat—such
case studies are described in Section 3. This can be oversimplified by stating that, for example, engineers may
look for engineering solutions to drought such as reservoir construction while agronomists may propose agricultural solutions such as increased irrigation efficiency; both of which solutions may increase water scarcity for
downstream users (Grafton et al., 2018; van Oel et al., 2018). Furthermore, in preparing a global drought risk map
(Meza et al., 2020) found that some countries with calculated low or intermediate drought risk had nevertheless
registered multiple drought events on the EM-DAT international disaster database (https://www.emdat.be/). This
was due to considerable spatial heterogeneity with regard to drought risk within countries, emphasizing the need
for localized contextualized drought assessment.
An important research question is not only how human actions induce or propagate drought (Van Loon et al., 2016),
but how human systems—through engineering, land use, agriculture, governance, and socio-economics—have
established a situation where drought is a threat. Moreover, human systems can also be mobilized to better deal
with drought. In other words, because humans have created situations where certain groups and sectors are at risk
of drought, they can also improve these situations. This study aims to encourage research toward drought risk
reduction by presenting a methodology to comprehensively, collaboratively, and contextually diagnose drought
to better deal with drought.
2. Drought Diagnosis
We aimed to develop a diagnostic procedure for the assessment and treatment of drought. To this end, we first
reviewed published literature from a range of disciplines to analyze the use of the term “diagnosis,” and its derivatives in relation to drought. The aim was to categorize the context in which “drought diagnosis” or “diagnosing
drought,” and so on, was used. A systematic literature search was conducted, which is described in the Supplementary Information.
The review revealed that consensus does not exist in the 40+ applicable papers that used the term on what it
means to diagnose drought, neither across nor within disciplines. What's more, it was extremely rare to come
across an explicit definition of what the authors meant by diagnosing drought. To “diagnose drought” can refer
to: evaluating a drought's climatological and/or non-climatological causes; analyzing its frequency, duration, and
severity; determining its type (e.g., meteorological, hydrological, etc.); assessing its impacts and resilience to
those impacts, and; development of drought management strategies. These points are all vital to improve understanding of drought at a particular location and to then use this knowledge to avoid or lessen drought impacts. An
all-encompassing definition of drought diagnosis would have to incorporate all these identified definitions to encourage their consideration in the process of diagnosing drought. Therefore, we propose adopting the most widely
known and understood definition of diagnosis, that used in the field of medicine, and applying it to drought.
We argue that drought diagnosis more closely aligning with the medical definition shifts the focus from merely
improving understanding to finding a cure, or at least reducing symptoms as much as possible following the analogy of drought being a chronic disorder. Furthermore, it emphasizes a diagnosis and treatment that is patient-specific, in other words, contextualized to a drought region and its vulnerabilities, rather than a generic solution.
2.1. Borrowing From Medical Literature: The Diagnostic Process
A dictionary definition of “diagnosis” is the identification of diseases by the examination of symptoms and signs
and by other investigations (Collins, 2021). By adopting this definition, we can leverage the wealth of experience and description within medical literature to guide the drought diagnostic process. Particularly for complex
health situations, the diagnostic process is a complex, collaborative activity that involves information gathering
and clinical reasoning with the goal of determining a patient's health problem and consequently how to treat
it. The aim of such a process is an accurate diagnosis made in a timely manner, thus giving the patient the best
opportunity for a positive health outcome because decision making will be tailored to a correct understanding of
WALKER ET AL.
3 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
the patient's health problem (Balogh et al., 2015). Translated to drought, the patient is considered the region of
interest—holistically, including the people, social systems, ecosystems, and economic sectors—and symptoms
are the drought impacts (who is the doctor is discussed in Section 4). Diagnosis is establishing what caused these
symptoms and informing ways in which to treat them. Therefore, an accurate and timely drought diagnosis would
provide the best opportunity to successfully apply prevention, mitigation, and preparedness measures specific to
local drought characteristics and impacts.
The commonly described steps of the diagnostic process are synthesized here:
1. Initial diagnostic assessment (anamnesis)—Evaluation and history of symptoms, patient history, physical
examination
2. Diagnostic testing—Further analyses to confirm the diagnosis
3. Consultation—Obtaining a second opinion from specialists
Steps 1–3 are a circular continuous process of information gathering, integration, and interpretation, involving
iterative hypothesis generation as more information is learned (e.g., Balogh et al., 2015).
4. Communication of the diagnosis
5. Treatment and prognosis
Diagnosis of complex health problems (we similarly consider drought to be a complex problem) starts with an
initial diagnostic assessment, or anamnesis. Anamnesis, that stems from the Greek words ana (bring again) and
mnesis (memory), means recollecting all the facts related to the patient and the illness. Anamnesis is considered
the most important step in medicine, because it is the basis of the doctor-patient relationship and because (technological) solutions can only be put to good use if the human side is sufficiently recognized. This is also particularly
relevant in diagnosis of drought, emphasizing the importance of conducting drought diagnosis with the participation of stakeholders. The stakeholders will be able to describe the impacts (symptoms) and share their opinions on
the potential causes and drivers. Comprehensive drought diagnosis thus ideally starts with identifying the relevant
stakeholders and identifying the symptoms they experience.
Diagnostic testing follows identification during the initial diagnostic assessment of what is not known and needs
to be further investigated.
Just as medical professionals regularly require consultations with specialists to gain a second opinion and to
confirm a diagnosis, drought researchers and policymakers should consult and collaborate with specialists from a
range of disciplines—an independent second opinion decreases the risk of tunnel vision and overlooked impacts
(for instance if not all stakeholders are well-represented). Diagnostic error in medicine commonly results from insufficient experience and speciality expertise (WHO, 2016); the same can be inferred for drought diagnosis, such
as when engineers identify only drought causes related to physical infrastructure and consequently propose only
hard engineering solutions like the construction of dams (Medeiros & Sivapalan, 2020). Additionally, coproduction of a drought diagnosis together with drought-affected stakeholders utilizes local contextualized knowledge
and is supported by a common maxim in medicine: “Just listen to your patient, he is telling you the diagnosis”
(attributed to William Osler in Gandhi, 2000).
Underlying medical diagnosis is an elaborate pre-existing taxonomy of diseases that a doctor relies on. A taxonomy does not exist for drought, other than perhaps categorizing by drought type (meteorological, agricultural,
hydrological, etc.). We are concerned here with how society is impacted by drought; therefore, it is the socio-economic and environmental drought impacts that need to be averted or lessened. The myriad combinations
of drivers and impacts mean such a taxonomy may not be possible for drought. As shown in Section 3, rather
than being a weakness, the lack of a drought taxonomy means initially inconceivable causes of drought may not
be overlooked in favor of more familiar diagnoses—a misdiagnosis issue well known to medicine (e.g., Kempe
et al., 1962). Similarly, an extensive knowledge base on treatment effectiveness and possible side-effects are not
available for drought. Though again, rather than being a weakness, this means treatments must be contextualized
to the specific drought-affected region and researchers must be open to identifying any possible side-effects of
treatment. The communication and treatment steps are another example of how drought science can learn from
the medical field. Doctors discuss potential treatments with their patients, providing prognoses (how the disorder
is likely to proceed) and ask for their preferences, which may be objective or subjective (e.g., local or general
WALKER ET AL.
4 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Figure 1. Conceptualization of the drought diagnostic process. Steps 1–3 are a cycle of information gathering, integration, interpretation, and identification of
what further assessment is necessary. The diagnosis is updated as new information is learned, including during and following treatment (represented by the lower
feedback arrow). In a variation from the medical analogy, steps 4 and 5, the communication of the diagnosis and the treatment and prognosis, would be specific to the
various actors, systems, and scales (on the right). These various actors would also necessarily coproduce the drought diagnosis and treatment plan alongside drought
researchers. The spatial scales, systems, and actors shown in the figure are illustrative rather than exhaustive and may include those that are outside the drought-affected
area.
anesthesia, tablets or injections, etc.); this increases the likelihood that the treatment plan will be followed. Similarly, coproducing drought risk reduction strategies will best support the actual implementation of the designed
plans.
2.2. Applicability to Drought Assessment
This is a methodological guide for conducting a comprehensive, collaborative, and contextualized drought diagnosis to enable development of treatment (or solutions) for drought. In addition, this enables us to identify
where the health of the systems in a region could be improved before a drought to prevent drought or make them
less impactful. A conceptualization of the drought diagnostic process is presented in Figure 1 and subsequently
described.
1. Initial diagnostic assessment (anamnesis)
• Evaluation and history of symptoms = Evaluation and history of impacts: the drought impacts. Evaluation
must consider both direct drought impacts—reduced river flow, soil moisture, and groundwater levels—
and, more importantly, indirect drought impacts—water scarcity, food insecurity, economic losses, unemployment, ill health, migration, conflict, ecosystem damage (for an extensive list of drought impacts see
IDMP (2014)). This evaluation should identify the most vulnerable social, economic, and environmental
sectors in consultation with local stakeholders.
• Patient history = Drought history: the history of drought risk in the region. This step analyses past drought
events to assess the drought hazard, exposure, and vulnerabilities. It is important to evaluate how these
determinants have changed over time, focusing especially on recent developments, for example, increasing water demand, land use changes, or dependency on particular water infrastructure. Drought hazard is
assessed by evaluating when droughts occurred, their type, frequency, duration, severity, and geographic
extent; drought indices are thus useful (see IDMP, 2016). Exposure and vulnerability are assessed by evaluating the socio-economics, agriculture, industry, policy decisions and policy responses, and governance,
especially to identify where they have created heterogeneity in exposure and vulnerability; calculation of
WALKER ET AL.
5 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
water demand and water use by different users is applicable here. For full guidance on drought risk assessments, see World Bank (2019).
• Physical examination = Physical characterization: physical characteristics that increase the likelihood of
impactful droughts. The physical characteristics are largely unchangeable within a drought management
plan and any drought treatment must work with these characteristics. Key elements are the projected regional and global climate (i.e., the likelihood of meteorological drought). Just as important are the natural
and human-modified hydrology (e.g., the total water storage capacity in natural lakes and rivers, constructed reservoirs, and aquifers, relative to annual renewable water availability to assess the susceptibility
to hydrological drought). Further important elements include soil type (the susceptibility to agricultural
drought), ecosystems (vulnerability to environmental drought), and the risk of other compounding natural
hazards.
2. Diagnostic testing: further data collection and analysis to confirm the diagnosis and inform which causes
of drought impacts can be treated. Diagnostic testing would involve analyzing potential drought drivers and
aggravating factors identified in the initial diagnostic assessment that have not been previously investigated.
It could thus be similar to “detection and attribution,” applied in climatology to detect and attribute extreme
events, to determine which treatable drivers and aggravating factors generate significant drought impacts.
Diagnostic testing could involve, for example, collection of narratives to assess perceived climate change impacts or increased vulnerabilities and exposure; household surveys or citizen science monitoring of domestic
water use or drought impacts; remote sensing analysis of informal water infrastructure; political ecology study
of governance structures and power relationships; gray literature analysis of drought management policy and
field research of the effectiveness of its implementation; participatory research or serious games to evaluate
farmers' decision-making on crop and seed selection, planting timing and drought coping strategies; and assessment of virtual water transfer utilizing import/export data.
3. Consultation: recognition that alternative expertise needs to be brought into a diagnosis. This could be
cross-disciplinary advice if the diagnostic testing reveals that drought impacts are, for example, less related to
water management but more due to agricultural choices or governance structures. This step also emphasizes
the importance of local expertise and stakeholder participation in the diagnostic process. Crucially, coproduction of the diagnosis with the range of actors shown in Figure 1 would facilitate the development of drought
prevention, mitigation, and preparedness strategies that are not beyond financial, political, physical, or cultural
bounds.
Figure 1 shows that steps 1–3 are part of a cycle of information gathering, integration, interpretation, and identification of what further assessment is necessary. The diagnosis is updated as new information is learned. It is
important to identify if sufficient information has been gathered to be confident in the diagnosis and subsequent
prescribed treatment.
4. Communication of the diagnosis: ensuring that the drought diagnosis reaches and is utilized by relevant stakeholders. Whereas the consultation step refers to information gathering, this communication step refers to
information dissemination. As illustrated in Figure 1, it is crucial for the communication of the diagnosis to be
contextualized, understandable and useful for different groups of stakeholders. Coproduction of the diagnosis
with representatives of all the relevant stakeholder groups would facilitate this step of the diagnostic process.
5. Treatment and prognosis: a comprehensive collaborative diagnosis, which includes adaptation and mitigation
strategies and policy advice, will enable the development of a contextualized drought preparedness plan specific to a range of different scales and stakeholders. In addition, the plan should aim toward a more proactive
approach to improve the general health of the relevant systems making impactful drought less likely, that is,
aiming to reduce exposure and vulnerability. Note that, as shown in Figure 1, insights gained from applying
the treatment, such as ineffective measures or unanticipated side effects, should be fed back to improve the
accuracy of the diagnosis and to potentially adjust the treatment. Drought diagnosis can also provide a drought
prognosis: 1. How a drought is likely to develop and what its impacts will be; 2. How the drought may respond
to “treatment” (i.e., will certain impacts be lessened, will there be any side-effects?); and 3. How the region
could be made less susceptible to drought (i.e., prevention rather than cure). Hence, the prognosis could
provide early warning by identifying a condition before its symptoms become apparent. Note that this step
requires ethical considerations: some symptoms might be treated at the expense of others. Indeed, it must be
appreciated that avoiding drought impacts altogether is likely impossible, thus, many “treatments” or “solutions” are actually risk reduction strategies.
WALKER ET AL.
6 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
2.3. Issues of Incomplete or Misdiagnosis
Medical misdiagnosis cases often involve failures in the stages of the initial diagnostic assessment (Balogh
et al., 2015). Analogous examples exist within the drought literature of misdiagnosis or incomplete diagnosis
that led to incorrect treatment that worsened rather than alleviated drought impacts. There are abundant drought
studies assessing aspects of the drought history and physical examination, such as those that compute drought
indices or calculate total water storage available in constructed reservoirs. Less common, or selectively conducted, is an evaluation and history of impacts (King-Okumu et al., 2020; Wilhite et al., 2007). This discrepancy
may be for reasons of data availability, ease of analysis, disciplinary background of those conducting the drought
assessment, or because there is a vested interest in leading the analysis toward a drought treatment that favors a
particular group (Kallis, 2008; Kchouk et al., 2021). For example, drought impacts such as regional economic
losses from decreased crop production are typically more straightforward to evaluate using openly available formal (governmental) data that predominantly arise from larger commercial farms. This type of drought diagnosis
could lead to solutions of increasing water availability for large farms, which may satisfy only high-level stakeholders. Drought impacts on smallholder farms such as reduced livelihood, food insecurity, and migration may
be given less consideration because the necessary data are rarely available requiring substantial interdisciplinary
investigation (i.e., diagnostic testing). Solutions are therefore less likely to provide relief to smallholder farmers
or might even aggravate the impacts on smallholder farmers who were (intentionally or unintentionally) disregarded in the initial diagnostic assessment. Comprehensive, collaborative, and contextualized drought diagnosis
following Figure 1 may result in drought treatments far from the water perspective involving, for example, road
construction, crop insurance, support of agricultural extension agents, cash transfers, or conflict resolution (e.g.,
Brooks et al., 2005; Detges, 2016; Poděbradská et al., 2020). Thus, drought researchers and stakeholders should
remain open to all solutions.
3. Drought Case Studies
The following case studies were selected to illustrate drought misdiagnosis, or incomplete drought diagnosis,
resulting from narrow drought assessment that has resulted in insufficient and inappropriate treatment. We present the research available in the literature showing how current and historic drought assessment at the case study
locations compares with our drought diagnostic process.
The selected case studies have deliberately contrasting scales, socio-economics, drought drivers, and impacts, and
are at different stages of implementing integrated drought management. The case studies demonstrate, however,
that there are common causes of drought misdiagnosis, which result from insufficient consideration of one or
more of the steps of the diagnostic process presented in Section 2.2.
The case studies' locations are shown in Figure 2. Table 1 provides background information for comparison.
3.1. Cape Town, South Africa
3.1.1. Situation
Cape Town lies at the southwestern tip of Western Cape, South Africa (Figure 2). The province has a Mediterranean climate along the coast though with hotter summers and colder winters inland; average annual precipitation
ranges from around 300 to 900 mm (Botai et al., 2017). The Western Cape Water Supply System is almost entirely
reliant on rainfall, consisting of six large reservoirs with a combined capacity of around 900 Mm3; agriculture
consumes 29% of this supply and 71% supplies the Greater Cape Town urban area where household consumption
is responsible for a 70% share (DWS, 2018).
The infamous “Cape Town Water Crisis” occurred in 2017–2018 when reservoir levels became so low (<20%
capacity) that “Day Zero” was approached, when municipal water supply would halt and Cape Town would become the world's first major city to run out of water (Sousa et al., 2018). The Greater Cape Town area experienced
3 years, 2015–2017, of below average rainfall, a meteorological drought event with a return period estimated at
several hundred years (Wolski, 2018). Previous multi-annual droughts occurred fairly recently from 2008–2011
to 1997–2000 (Botai et al., 2017) and water usage restrictions were introduced in 2000–2001 and 2004–2005
(Matthews, 2005). However, the measures progressively introduced from 2016 to 2018 were the most stringent
with city-wide water pressure reductions, increased water tariffs, water rationing with large fines for exceedance
WALKER ET AL.
7 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Figure 2. Location maps of the four selected drought case studies (Table 1).
along with online “naming and shaming,” and establishment of the world's first “water police”—a squad of 60
officers acting largely on neighbor tip-offs to investigate water misuse (McCarthy, 2018; Parks et al., 2019).
Since the 1980s, water management had been guided by models of excellent repute that linked real-time and
predicted stream flows, water storage, river basins, transmission channels, and demand projections, which could
crucially be used to assess risks of supply failures to different categories of users and evaluate the effectiveness of
responses such as restrictions (Muller, 2018). The models had guided policymakers suggesting where and when
new reservoirs would be required to meet rising demand from the increasing population (a doubling from 2 to 4
million from 1987 to 2014); indeed in 2009, the models indicated water supplies would fall short by 2015 (Muller, 2018; World Population Review, 2021). The traditional diagnosis considered that impacts of drought could
be mitigated by simply constantly expanding the reservoir network as demand grew. However, by the 2000s,
policymakers were swayed by environmentalist pressures to reduce dam construction and the high necessary
capital investment was diverted elsewhere, the cost of further infrastructure considered to outweigh the drought
risk (Muller, 2018). When the 2015–2018 drought hit, drought management quickly became crisis management
prioritizing reducing water consumption and rationing the remaining water supply from the reservoirs (Parks
et al., 2019).
3.1.2. Misdiagnosis
There is a significant body of literature examining the Cape Town Water Crisis, which details what was missed
by policymakers and decision-makers in the lead up to the drought. The causes, symptoms, and oversights can be
mapped onto the diagnostic process of Section 2.2. Muller (2020) argues that there was overreliance on demand
management to balance supply and demand in the rapidly growing city. This argument suggests an insufficient
physical examination, an underappreciation of the physical characteristics of the area, namely the capacity of
the water storage infrastructure. Muller (2020) further noted that demand calculations had failed to appreciate
that even though agriculture typically consumed less water than its quota permitted, during periods of drought
the agricultural consumption from the municipal supply would increase, demonstrating a lack of thorough assessment of drought history. Indeed, during the drought there was criticism of agricultural water consumption
at the expense of urban supply (Robins, 2019). However, a thorough evaluation and history of impacts would
have shown that agriculture was already severely affected and reduced agricultural production had impacted the
national economy, local food prices and consequent nutritional intake, and employment of up to 50,000 seasonal
workers; the latter points having a disproportionate impact on the poor (GroundUp, 2021).
WALKER ET AL.
8 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Table 1
Details of the Four Drought Case Studies (Figure 2)
Location
Köppen climatea
Scale
Number
of
scientific
studiesc
Population
Gini
indexb
4 million
0.62
144
Main drought impacts
Cape Town, South Africa
City
Csa
Water scarcity,
reduced economy
California, USA
State
Csa, Csb, BSk, BSh, BWk, BWh
39.6 million
0.49
3,370
Sertão, Northeast Brazil
Multi-state
BSh, Aw
27.8 million
0.57
634
Water scarcity, food
insecurity, poor
health, poverty,
migration
Horn of Africa (Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia)
Multi-country BSh, BWh
∼80 million
∼0.39
1,683
Water scarcity, food
insecurity and
famine, disease,
migration
Groundwater depletion
and consequent
subsidence,
ecosystem loss
(forest die-off,
drying rivers,
increased
delta salinity),
wildfires, reduced
hydroelectricity
output
a
Csa = hot summer Mediterranean, Csb = warm summer Mediterranean, BSk = cold semi-arid, BSh = hot semi-arid, BWk = cold desert, BWh = hot desert,
Aw = savanna (Beck et al., 2018). bThe Gini index, or Gini coefficient, is a measure of economic inequality among a population. A score of 0 represents perfect equality
and 1 represents perfect inequality. The Cape Town value is for the Western Cape, which is slightly better than the national score of 0.65, which is the global worst
(source: StatsSA, 2019). The California value ranks as the fifth-worst US state; the national score is 0.48 (source: US Census Bureau, 2019). The Northeast Brazil
region ranks worst of Brazil's five regions; the national score is 0.55, which is the ninth-worst in the world (source: CEIC, 2017). The individual Horn of Africa scores
are: Djibouti 0.43, Ethiopia 0.35, Kenya 0.41, Somalia 0.37 (source: World Bank, 2021b). cRefers to the number of scientific publications identified by Web of Science
when searching for drought AND [case study region]; see the Supplementary Information for further detail.
Mid-drought it was common for politicians amongst others to blame climate change. Even though climate change
would increase the likelihood of such droughts, this would only expose the vulnerability of a water system so
completely reliant on rainfall designed to cope with only a one in 50 years drought event (wrongly) assuming stationarity (Otto et al., 2018). Again, this reflects a poor physical examination, or, an underappreciation of the physical characteristics of both the water infrastructure and the climate systems. Other politicians blamed each other
for the crisis: the Democratic Alliance (DA) led City of Cape Town and Western Cape governments blamed the
national ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), for withholding funding and support to embarrass
and tarnish the DA while the ANC accused the DA of poor forward planning (Saunderson-Meyer, 2018). Proposals by policymakers following the drought showed faith in the traditional diagnosis, that is, there is no evidence of
an updated diagnosis, as solutions are mostly to augment water supplies through (in order of significance): basin
transfer, desalination, groundwater exploration, and waste water reuse (COCT, 2020).
Further diagnostic testing through a political ecology lens proposes an alternative hypothesis. While inequality is
well-known in South Africa (Table 1) and socio-economic assessment is a requisite aspect of the drought history
step of the diagnostic process, political ecology analysis suggests that the 2015–2018 drought accelerated and
exacerbated a pre-existing water crisis. Savelli et al. (2021) and Enqvist et al. (2020) showed how Cape Town's
political legacy encouraged unsustainable levels of water consumption amongst the (white) elite and tolerated
chronic water insecurity amongst (black) informal dwellers. In past decades as investment increased and the reservoir network expanded, the beneficiaries were the wealthier citizens who could afford, and were thus able to
use, more water. Meanwhile, despite progressive policies to ensure universal access to water and basic services,
precarious living conditions and poor access to water services prevailed in the townships (McDonald, 2012).
Per capita water consumption ranged from 10 L per day in informal settlements that accounted for only 4% of
WALKER ET AL.
9 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
the city's water consumption, up to 1000s L per day in upper class areas that, combined with middle classes,
comprised approximately 38% of the population but consumed 70% of the city's supply (Robins, 2019; Savelli
et al., 2021). For further illustration of this water inequality, 140 million L per day went to gardens, 100 million L
per day went to golf courses, and 10 million L per day to the city's 68,000 swimming pools, which alone consume
as much water as 47,000 low-income households (McDonald, 2012).
Through 2015–2018 this existing inequality in water use persisted leading to unequal experiences of drought and
water insecurity for diverse social groups. While wealthier households had to make the most drastic reductions
to their municipal water consumption or face high tariffs and fines, their socio-economic situation meant coping
strategies were available enabling them to maintain existing lifestyles, such as purchase of bottled water and rainwater storage tanks, use of spring water collected outside the city, drilling of private boreholes where hydrogeologically feasible (up to 30,000), and the use of swimming pools as reservoirs (Robins, 2019; Savelli et al., 2021).
The experience for township dwellers was markedly different: the Free Basic Water policy that ensured 6000 L
per household per month—often insufficient due to large numbers occupying each household—was suspended in
place of tariffs that were unaffordable to many; the same household water restrictions were applied in townships
as in middle and upper class areas though the average number of dwellers per household being so much higher
meant much less water per person (intensive installation of meters restricted household water use); interruptions
to water supply meant lifestyle changes such as reducing showering, clothes washing, and house cleaning and
getting up and cooking before 4 a.m. to take advantage of water availability (Robins, 2019; Savelli et al., 2021).
Therefore, a more comprehensive and contextualized diagnosis reveals that preparation for the next drought
should not focus solely on augmenting the water supply. The health of the system as a whole needs to be improved
with a change of political and economic focus to a more sustainable and equitable distribution of the available
water across society (Enqvist et al., 2020; Savelli et al., 2021).
3.2. California, USA
3.2.1. Situation
California lies on the Pacific coast of southwest USA (Figure 2). With 39.6 million inhabitants, it is the most
populous state in the USA and if it were an independent country, it would rank fifth in the world for the size of
its economy (Forbes, 2020; World Population Review, 2021). Precipitation mostly falls in winter months as snow
in the Sierra Nevada mountains and rainfall predominantly in the north of the state. While 80% of precipitation
falls in the winter, around 75% of demand is in the summer and while 75% of supply originates from the north
of the state, 80% of demand is from the south (Purkey et al., 2007; Water Education Foundation, 2021). Water
use averages around 50% for the environment, 40% for agriculture, and 10% for urban supply, the latter including
industrial and domestic uses (Mount & Hanak, 2016).
To bridge the spatiotemporal gap between water supply and demand, the state heavily relies on groundwater and
water transfers into the state. Groundwater supplies 40% of the state's water, increasing to 60% during drought
years (Stokstad, 2020). The Central Valley Project in 1937 and the California State Water Project in the 1960s
developed the largest multi-purpose integrated water delivery system in the country. This system provides water
supply to ∼27 million people and irrigates 300,000 ha of farmland. Although this system is the fourth-largest
generator of hydroelectricity in the state, moving many km3 of water, it comes at the cost of also being the
largest electricity consumer (SOC, 2021). California is one of the largest fruit producers in the United States
(CDFA, 2020), and one of the leaders in the production of high economic value and water consumptive goods
such as alfalfa, almonds, pistachios, and cotton (Johnson & Cody, 2015)
California is a drought-prone state; notable recent drought events occurred in 1976–1977, 1987–1992, 2007–
2010, 2012–2017, 2018, and 2020–2021 (NIDIS, 2021). Recent droughts are increasingly attributed to anthropogenic climate change, as higher air temperatures and reduced precipitation have resulted in less snowpack
built during the winter (December–February), and earlier melting during the spring (March–May, AghaKouchak
et al., 2014; Berg & Hall, 2017; Diffenbaugh et al., 2015). The reduced snowpack reduces water availability for
the summer months, but the water from early snow melting could contribute to storage in California's reservoirs.
However, the early snow melting coincides with the California flooding season, when the multi-purpose reservoirs are kept at safety (low) levels. As such, California water managers rely on seasonal forecasts for reservoir
operations to decide when and how much water to release for flood control and how much water to maintain to
WALKER ET AL.
10 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
supply the summer months' demand (Cohen et al., 2020; Wanders et al., 2017). Hence, when more water than
is needed is released during the flood control period and unexpected drought hits, the region relies mostly on
groundwater and inter-state transfers. Although groundwater abstraction can buffer short-term drought impacts
in agriculture and domestic water supply, multi-year droughts compound decreased groundwater recharge with
increased reliance on groundwater abstraction and an increasing water demand. Diagnostic testing shows that
the level of groundwater use is unsustainable leading to multiple severe side effects. Studies utilizing NASA's
Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) satellite mission showed aquifers are depleting (Scanlon
et al., 2012; Thomas et al., 2017); satellite-based interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR), continuous global positioning systems (CGPS), and extensometer data showed that the ground is subsiding (Chaussard
et al., 2017; Faunt et al., 2016); and analysis of physical, biogeochemical and biological changes showed that
aquatic ecosystems are declining (Christian-Smith et al., 2011; Winder et al., 2011).
During the 2012–2017 drought, around 123 million trees were lost (US Forest Service, 2019). The resulting abundance of flammable dead woody material fuelled extensive wildfires, including those of 2020, which were the
most extensive on record burning 4% of California (Swain, 2021). These wildfires lead to fatalities, infrastructure
damage, loss of ecosystems, and poor air quality with associated health impacts both locally and across the USA
as smoke was transported by atmospheric currents (Shi et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2018). California's rivers have
legislated minimum environmental flow requirements; however, they may not always be met during droughts
adversely affecting river ecology (Stewart et al., 2020). An additional impact of hydrological droughts is reduced
hydroelectricity production, resulting in additional costs passed on to the consumer measured in US$ billions
along with the environmental cost of increased fossil fuel use for energy production, such as an extra 23 million
tonnes of CO2 emissions from 2012 to 2015 (Gleick, 2015). Drought impacts on leisure activities include the ski
industry suffering from a lack of snow and low water levels affecting boating and fishing (Lund et al., 2018).
3.2.2. Misdiagnosis
Misdiagnosis of drought in California has stemmed from the assumption that continually increasing groundwater
abstraction will buffer water shortage, and this has largely mitigated severe impacts on irrigated agriculture in the
short term. However, this is an example of a short-term palliative treatment worsening the long-term chronic disease. Appreciation of this misdiagnosis led to introduction of California's Sustainable Groundwater Management
Act in 2014, which requires reaching basin groundwater sustainability by 2040. Achieving this aim could fundamentally alter California's agriculture as it will need permanent fallowing of some irrigated areas, land use change
to facilitate groundwater recharge in wetter years, and some claim there will probably still be a requirement for
significant infrastructure investment for additional basin transfer (Nelson et al., 2016). However, broader evaluation and history of impacts reveals drought impacts independent of reaching basin groundwater sustainability,
such as reduced hydroelectricity generation, forest die-off, and declining ski industry.
Since the early 1900s, the economy and population of California grew through extensive infrastructure developments. With 95% of its residents living in urban areas, the highest percentage in the country, cities have expanded
in environmentally, economically, and socially unsustainable ways and generated conflicting demands with agriculture for adequate drinking water supply (Di Baldassarre et al., 2021; US Census Bureau, 2012). The legacy
of dam construction and high groundwater abstraction that drove this growth has led to a lock-in condition with
unsustainable levels of water consumption that are very difficult to reverse (Di Baldassarre et al., 2021).
To meet the increasing water demand and ensure water access, since the 1930s, California implemented a complex hierarchical water rights system with priorities based on when their water rights were claimed (Attwater &
Markle, 1987). This system is neither fair nor efficient. Diagnostic testing estimated that California had allocated
water rights of about five times the volume of water available in an average year (Grantham & Viers, 2014). Furthermore, when a drought hits, junior water rights (often located far from the river streams and the water pipeline
grid) are required to reduce consumption, while senior riparian water users can abstract as much as their water
rights grant them (Null et al., 2016). While this measure reduces overall consumption, continued water abstraction at the riparian zones leads to reduced downstream flows and off-grid water availability, directly impacting
underprivileged communities and ecosystems. Treatment for these drought impacts would include revising the
current water rights system. However, because California water rights are tied to the value of the land, updating
them infers an entire socio-economic restructuring. Currently, such unequal water access and restrictions are
accelerating cycles of inequality and deprivation, leading to potential armed conflicts (Barlow et al., 2017) and
worsening ecological impacts (Stewart et al., 2020).
WALKER ET AL.
11 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Reliance on infrastructure and out-of-state waters, such as from the Colorado River, has also led to conflicts, such
as the disputes over water distribution between California and Arizona (Stern & Sheikh, 2020). During drought
years, California has ensured allocation of a minimum amount of water, while Arizona must deal with reduced
supply. These measures and the increasing frequency of droughts directly led to the death of Colorado River
Delta ecosystems in Mexico (Owen et al., 2017). Although California aims to ensure minimum environmental
flows locally, ecosystem impacts downstream and out of state have been largely overlooked (Rivera-Torres &
Gerlak, 2021).
A wealth of studies have conducted further diagnostic testing linking California's drought impacts to anthropogenic climate change (AghaKouchak et al., 2014; Berg & Hall, 2017; Mann & Gleick, 2015). Future climate
projections warn of a potential climate shift towards arid desert conditions (Beck et al., 2018), thus policymakers
are again advocating for supply side solutions such as dam construction and managed aquifer recharge (Perry &
Praskievicz, 2017). However, it seems apparent that treatment requires reductions in water consumption, potentially requiring fundamental adjustments to agricultural practices and lifestyles as well as revision of water rights
and inter-state water transfer agreements.
3.3. Sertão, Northeast Brazil
3.3.1. Situation
The Sertão is a semi-arid region of Northeast Brazil, sometimes known as the “Drought Polygon,” comprising 10
states: Alagoas, Bahia, Pernambuco, Paraíba, Rio Grande do Norte, Ceará, Maranhão, Piauí, Sergipe, and Minas
Gerais (Figure 2). This region makes up 13.2% (1,128,697 km2) of Brazil and with a population of 27.8 million
is one of the world's most densely populated dryland regions (SUDENE, 2017). Rainfall is relatively high for a
semi-arid region, averaging around 750 mm per year, though it is concentrated into just 4 months with high spatial heterogeneity, intense rainfall events, and significant interannual variability (Martins & Reis Junior, 2021).
High temperatures and low humidity cause annual evapotranspiration exceeding 2,000 mm, while poor shallow
soils above crystalline geology create a lack of aquifers and only intermittent rivers (Magalhães, 2017).
Northeast Brazil is drought-prone with one of the worst occurring in 1877–1879; known as The Great Drought,
it was the most impactful in the history of Brazil, when up to 500,000 people died of famine and mass migration
was triggered (Greenfield, 2001). The most recent drought lasted from 2012 to 2018 and was both the most prolonged and most severe in terms of rainfall deficit since rainfall monitoring began around 110 years ago (Pontes
Filho et al., 2020). It proved devastating to many agricultural, livestock, and industrial producers (Gutiérrez
et al., 2014). Smallholder farmers, who comprise 28% of the population and 95% of the agricultural sector,
were hardest hit due to their reliance on rainfed agriculture for their livelihoods. Crop losses were estimated at
70%–80% and economic losses at over US$3 billion (Brito et al., 2018). As reservoir volumes collapsed, towns
and cities suffered from a lack of domestic water supply and an increase in water-related disease due to poor water
quality, in addition to food insecurity (Eakin et al., 2014).
Droughts preceding the mid-twentieth century were severely impactful due to insufficient infrastructure and
logistics (for example, water and grain storage and delivery), as well as overly political, fragile, and unqualified public administration (for example, drought mitigation programs were uncoordinated, and there was a lack
of transparency and communication with society, Martins & Magalhães, 2015). Subsequently, government approaches to deal with drought focused for a long time only on increasing water supply: especially heavy investments were made in the 1990s and 2000s on water infrastructure which was perceived as a definitive and effective
treatment (Martins & Reis Junior, 2021). Emergency government responses during the 2012–2018 drought were
based on an evaluation and history of impacts and included tanker trucks to supply water to rural towns, food
donations in the most vulnerable areas, and creation of work fronts (government work projects) with the aim of
employing drought-affected populations during drought to build dams and roads. These actions are in addition
to emergency financial responses aimed at farmers including subsidized grain prices to prevent decimation of
livestock, and renegotiation of farmers' debt (Magalhães, 2017).
3.3.2. Misdiagnosis
Drought misdiagnosis stems from the focus on dam construction, oriented by the paradigm of “fight against
drought”; the rationale that hydraulic solutions like reservoirs, wells, water supply systems, and irrigation projects
WALKER ET AL.
12 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
would prevent water shortage, thus reducing exposure and vulnerability to drought (Machado & Rovere, 2018;
Silva, 2003). This idea was reinforced by the hydraulic mission approach that was ongoing worldwide since the
nineteenth century and defined as “the strong belief that every drop of water flowing into the ocean is a waste
and that the state should develop hydraulic infrastructure to capture as much water as possible for human use”
(Wester, 2008). When capacity of the large strategic reservoirs in some areas exceeded average annual runoff volume by a factor of two (demonstrating an insufficient physical examination of the hydrometeorology), inter-basin
transfers were constructed; though all this water infrastructure principally maintains supply to the large coastal
cities and industrial areas, and formal irrigation areas (Medeiros & Sivapalan, 2020).
To preserve their own water supply, rural municipalities and smallholders have constructed countless small informal and unmonitored reservoirs; the most recent estimate by FUNCEME (Fundação Cearense de Meteorologia
e Recursos Hídricos) is that there are 105,813 such reservoirs in Ceará state alone (FUNCEME, 2021). However,
holding back water upstream exacerbated hydrological drought downstream (van Langen et al., 2021) and the
perceived increased water security that reservoir construction provided may have led to further unsustainable
water use. The impact of these small reservoirs would likely be unknown in any physical examination due to uncertainty over their number and capacity; only further diagnostic testing, such as through remote sensing analysis
and numerical modeling, can show that their presence can extend hydrological drought by up to 80% (Ribeiro
Neto et al., 2021). What's more, de Araújo and Bronstert (2016) demonstrated that the small informal reservoirs
are an insufficient treatment for smallholders as they cannot buffer long-term droughts.
Diagnostic testing revealed that politics is a recurrent drought driver with studies claiming that government officials formerly withheld emergency response or profiteered through its provision (Herwehe & Scott, 2018). Bedran-Martins and Lemos (2017) described how “the drought industry” was not conducive to increasing resilience
because drought-affected vulnerable rural populations depended on state-sponsored social programs to survive
and politicians exchanged placement in these programs for votes. What's more, these programs addressed only
the symptoms and not the causes of vulnerability so failed to build long-term resilience, and, because political
survival depended on their votes, there was little incentive for politicians to reduce vulnerability. In 2014, the
Drought Monitor (https://monitordesecas.ana.gov.br/) was implemented in Northeast Brazil. It is a map of current
drought conditions, updated monthly, based on several drought indices. Drought conditions on the map dictate the
deployment of water trucks to alleviate drought-induced water scarcity, thus depoliticizing emergency response.
However, Martins and Magalhães (2015) noted that a time of political transition can still affect drought response
in terms of public finance. In 2013, for example, the mayor who had assumed control of a Sertão municipality did
not have access to the available resources to respond to the initial stages of the 2012–2018 drought in part because
his predecessor had withheld pertinent information.
The impacts of droughts on smallholder farmers have been reduced by the implementation of policies that were
not initially intended as strategies to reduce drought impacts but ended up benefiting the part of the population
that was most affected. Diagnostic testing suggests that policies far from the water perspective play a role in
reducing vulnerabilities. The nationwide social program to alleviate poverty by providing a minimum income,
the Bolsa Família, is most effective at treating the worst drought symptoms particularly improving food security
(Sena et al., 2018). The Brazilian Food Acquisition Program (PAA) seeks to promote the productive inclusion of
farmers and guarantee the population's access to healthy food. In the context of drought, the PAA functions as a
food safety net for vulnerable populations (Mesquita & Milhorance, 2019). The main objective of the Program
for the Promotion of Rural Productive Activities (Fomento) is to stimulate the generation of work and income and
promote food and nutritional security; it has helped to improve the adaptability of smallholder farmers (Mesquita
et al., 2020). These treatments demonstrate that reducing vulnerability is more effective than treating symptoms.
From the water perspective, the greatest positive impacts to smallholder farmers are from the Cisterns program.
This program is based on the construction of social technologies for rainwater harvesting, with positive impacts
on food and water security for beneficiaries (Arsky, 2020; Fagundes et al., 2020), and with the potential to
promote climate adaptation (Cavalcante et al., 2020). Cisterns represent the paradigm shift in Northeast Brazil
toward “living with drought” (Arsky, 2020; Silva, 2003). Furthermore, the program is an example of how family
farming innovations can be transformed into public policies, as through the action of civil society its dissemination has reached the level of national policy (Santana & Arsky, 2016).
WALKER ET AL.
13 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
The treatment of drought remains based on the traditional (mis)diagnosis prescribing improvement of infrastructure while drought policies remain short-term and uncoordinated—especially across the three administrative
levels (federal, state, and municipal)—and very sector-oriented (Martins & Reis Junior, 2021). New basin transfer
projects, such as the São Francisco Water Transfer, are under construction and were designed to guarantee current
demand though there are already plans for new irrigation projects and to attract businesses to the region that may
not be water sensitive (Roman, 2017). What is more, climate models project that the region will experience reductions in precipitation combined with increased evapotranspiration, ultimately suggesting an increased likelihood
of droughts over the coming decades (Gondim et al., 2018). Without greater focus on managing demand and
resolving issues of where the water will be brought, for what and for whom, the drought prognosis for Northeast
Brazil is for vulnerability and exposure to increase.
3.4. Horn of Africa
3.4.1. Situation
The Horn of Africa comprises the arid to semi-arid region of the African continent that stretches easternmost into
the Arabian Sea. We consider here the most drought-prone Horn of Africa region to include the entirety of Somalia and Djibouti as well as significant proportions of Ethiopia and Kenya (Figure 2). The region has a population
of around 80 million with some of the highest population growth rates in the world at around 3%, equating to a
doubling of population every 23 years (World Bank, 2020). There are significant differences between the countries in terms of Human Development Index, though all are ranked below 140 out of 180 countries (UNDP, 2020).
The discrepancies are more pronounced in the ND-GAIN Country Index that summarizes a country's vulnerability to climate change and other global challenges: Djibouti ranks 117, Kenya 152, Ethiopia 157, and Somalia
at 179 is the second most vulnerable country on Earth (ND-GAIN, 2018). Rainfall is sparse, generally under
500 mm per year, evapotranspiration is high due to temperatures averaging over 27oC, and water resources are
generally ephemeral and unprotected (Ghebrezgabher et al., 2016). Rainfed agriculture and pastoralism provide
livelihoods for the majority of the population though much of the region is unsuitable for agriculture and food is
imported (Arcanjo, 2020).
Droughts in the Horn of Africa are increasing in frequency and severity (Nicholson, 2014). Consequently,
drought-driven humanitarian emergencies are becoming more common where millions of people face chronic
water and food insecurity (Thomas et al., 2020). Hardest hit in terms of preventable death and malnutrition are
pastoral communities who number in the tens of millions comprising around 10% of Ethiopia's population, 20%
of Djibouti's and 70% of Somalia's population, yet who have been politically marginalized since colonial times
(IGAD, 2007; Thomas et al., 2020).
Compounding these droughts are land degradation and desertification caused by drought but exacerbated by
overgrazing and other poor agricultural and land management practices often because people concentrated or
were driven into drought-prone areas (Mengisteab, 2012).
In the last decade, the Horn of Africa has experienced almost continuous severe drought peaking in 2011 and
2017 with an easing of drought conditions during only 2012–2015 (Funk, 2020; Reliefweb, 2021). In Somalia,
failed rains cause widespread crop losses and livestock deaths leading to famine and cholera outbreaks (Prinsloo, 2017). In Northern and Eastern Kenya, pastoralists seeing their livestock decline search for greener pastures
and consistent water sources resulting in violent clashes between groups, rustling, and poaching of wildlife from
national parks, which additionally impacts Kenya's tourism industry (Kioko, 2013). Ethiopia is synonymous in
the public consciousness with the drought-induced famines of the 1970s and 1980s; still today, emergency food
aid is a regular requirement due to the predominance of rainfed agriculture, which provides livelihood for 89% of
the population and constitutes 39% of GDP (Gross Domestic Product, Kassawmar et al., 2018; Haile et al., 2019).
Djibouti imports around 80% of its food (Qu et al., 2019) meaning it is less directly vulnerable to drought and
also less indirectly affected by drought in the Horn of Africa causing food price rises because most food imports
originate outside of the region (OEC, 2019).
3.4.2. Misdiagnosis
The same drought with the same hydrometeorological effects may be experienced across the Horn of Africa, yet
the impacts are experienced very differently by each country and by each diverse group of inhabitants. Drought
WALKER ET AL.
14 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
diagnosis and treatment must therefore be contextualized to different locations within the region. Although there
have been successful efforts in the region targeting vulnerability, comprehensive drought diagnoses are lacking, resulting in pessimistic prognoses in the face of increasing droughts. That is, initial diagnostic assessments
have been conducted and treatments developed, though not sufficiently comprehensively and collaboratively to
increase resilience for all. Further research, that we would consider diagnostic testing, is sparser than for other
areas of the world (see Table 2 and Kchouk et al. (2021)) and often reveals that the drought drivers include the
previously prescribed drought treatments.
Although Ethiopia is considered the country with the highest population in Africa affected by drought, government initiatives such as cash/food-for-work programs, environmental rehabilitation, and sustainable intensification of agriculture have lifted millions out of poverty thus reducing vulnerability (Haile et al., 2019; Shiferaw
et al., 2014). For example, the droughts of 2003–2004 and 2010–2011 were more severe and extensive than
1984–1985, but only that earliest drought saw tens of millions face starvation and around 750,000 deaths (Haile
et al., 2019). Nevertheless, this vulnerability-reducing treatment was insufficient and comprehensive drought diagnosis is needed because recent droughts still required emergency food aid for millions. Combined government
and non-governmental organisation (NGO) efforts in semi-arid Kenya involving sand dam construction, capacity building regarding soil and water conservation techniques, and diversification of agricultural practices have
similarly decreased vulnerability to drought by improving water and food security as well as lifting people from
poverty (Kairu, 2021). However, some say these programmes are anti-pastoralist, who have their own traditional
drought coping strategies, forcing them from their traditional lands and into settled agriculture increasing their
vulnerability to drought (Farah et al., 2003; Fratkin, 2014).
Regarding Somalia, while failed rains are blamed for drought impacts (Funk, 2020; Prinsloo, 2017), diagnostic
testing could show that the real driver is the humanitarian situation the population find themselves in. Somalia
is exceptionally vulnerable to natural hazards due to the millions of internally displaced persons (IDPs) living in
destitute temporary camps after fleeing from conflict or migrating from areas where previous droughts and overgrazing have caused desertification and loss of livelihoods (Reliefweb, 2021). This issue spills over into neighboring regions. The low-middle income status and political stability of Kenya means it should be better able to
cope with drought (Haile et al., 2019). However, in addition to dealing with its own food security during drought,
there is the additional burden of over 250,000 Somalis residing in refugee camps within Kenya who fled famine
and chronic insecurity in Somalia (UNHCR, 2021). In Ethiopia, Somali refugees number around 200,000, and
this is combined with over 3 million Ethiopian IDPs who were displaced due to ethnic and border-based conflicts,
as well as collapsed crop production and water resources following droughts, locust invasions and floods (Reliefweb, 2020). This displacement puts even greater pressure on scarce resources and exposes a greater number
of vulnerable people. Djibouti also hosts IDPs as desertification makes life increasingly untenable in rural areas;
informal settlements are appearing in wadi beds on the edges of Djibouti City that are vulnerable to flash floods
that occur every few years (Nour Ayeh et al., 2014).
Drought diagnosis must consider the effects of humanitarian aid that has traditionally been used as a solution to
drought in the Horn of Africa. In other words, research should consider the feedback arrow in Figure 1 concerning
information on accuracy, effectiveness, and side effects of previous measures. In Somalia, the people most impacted by famine often do not receive food aid due to: conflict preventing access; long-term instability reducing
the presence of donor agencies; armed groups and officials diverting aid elsewhere; and low-status groups lacking
the social capital to access aid (Menkhaus, 2012). In the wider Horn of Africa region, it has been pointed out that
emergency relief alone is insufficient unless it is supported by development to build drought-resilient societies
(Muller, 2014). Emergency response solidifies vulnerabilities, to drought and other natural hazards, by increasing
reliance on donor agencies and the government. It is criticized as being inefficient, ineffective, untimely and a
disincentive to the sustainable use of natural resources because it does not promote self-reliance (Wilhite, 2000).
Another critical element for reducing vulnerability is a drought early warning system (EWS). However, the Horn
of Africa lacks hydrometeorological observational data (Walker et al., 2016); conflict and political instability
restrict access for monitoring of drought impacts; and EWS are only effective in saving lives when combined
with currently lacking mechanisms for early actions (Muller, 2014). An additional impact of political instability
is created by the transboundary nature of water resources. The Juba and Shebelle basins were the breadbasket
of Somalia for decades until the fall of the government in 1990. Nowadays, the irrigation and flood prevention schemes have fallen into disrepair, local operational knowledge has been lost, and there are concerns that
WALKER ET AL.
15 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Table 2
Synthesis of the Four Drought Case Studies
Case study
Cape Town, Western
Cape, South Africa
California, USA
WALKER ET AL.
1. Initial diagnostic
assessment
2. Diagnostic testing
3. Consultation
4. Communication of
diagnosis
5. Treatment and
prognosis
Incomplete diagnosis
suggested drought
driven by rainfall
deficit and
insufficient reservoir
storage capacity.
Insufficient
Insufficient
Successful
communication
during the crisis
(countdown to Day
Zero) led to water use
reductions.
Incomplete diagnosis
led to water use
restrictions and plans
for water supply
augmentation. The
prognosis is that
these actions do not
address the drought
impacts experienced
by the vulnerable.
Agricultural water
consumption
increases (up to
its quota) during
droughts. Water
infrastructure has not
kept pace with the
city's growth and is
unsuitable for current
(and future) climate.
Political ecology analysis
uncovered the
significance of water
use inequality.
Involve disciplines
beyond engineering
and work with
most vulnerable,
particularly
inhabitants of
townships.
More focus could be
given to prevention
of excessive water
use during nondrought periods.
Comprehensive and
collaborative
diagnosis indicates
that treatment
requires equitable
and sustainable
distribution of
available water
resources throughout
society.
The increasing demand
for agricultural and
urban water supply
led to unsustainable
water abstractions,
particularly of
groundwater during
drought years.
Analysis showed
that aquifers are
depleting, the ground
is subsiding, and
aquatic ecosystems
are declining.
Involved natural
scientists and
engineers from a
range of disciplines.
Communication of the
prognosis during
drought periods has
led to temporary
reductions in
domestic and
agricultural water
use.
The 2014 Sustainable
Groundwater
Management Act
seeks to balance
abstraction and
recharge and
sets minimum
environmental flow
legislation. Demandside water use
restrictions continue
to be imposed during
drought periods.
Unsustainable water
consumption driven
by infrastructure
augmentation.
Anthropogenic
drought drivers
compounded by
climate changeinduced rainfall and
snowfall deficit and
heat.
Water rights and
inter-state transfers
negatively impact
the underprivileged
and ecosystems.
Acknowledgment
that California is a
dry state.
Involve social scientists,
economists,
politicians, and
affected communities
and industries to
strategize how to
reduce unsustainable
levels of water
consumption.
Arid conditions and
droughts projected to
be “the new normal”;
this must be candidly
communicated along
with implications for
water use.
The water rights system
and inter-state water
transfer agreements
should be revised to
be more equitable
and sustainable.
Reducing water
consumption will
likely require
substantial changes to
agricultural practices
(e.g., shifting away
from water-intensive
crops) and lifestyles.
16 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Table 2
Continued
Case study
Sertão, Northeast Brazil
Horn of Africa
1. Initial diagnostic
assessment
2. Diagnostic testing
3. Consultation
4. Communication of
diagnosis
5. Treatment and
prognosis
Incomplete diagnosis
suggested that
droughts are driven
by rainfall deficit,
limited aquifers,
and previously
insufficient though
now excessive
reservoir storage
capacity.
Investigation of the
politics of the
region showed how
it has contributed
to preserving
vulnerability.
Involved mostly
institutions
concerned with water
management, thus
responses generally
related to augmenting
water supply.
It is challenging to utilize
the Drought Monitor
data to inform policyand decision-making.
Incomplete diagnosis
led to water supply
augmentation
(more reservoirs,
basin transfers) and
emergency response
(water trucks,
temporary jobs, crop
insurance). In the
past, vulnerabilities
were preserved by
paternalism and
clientelism.
Droughts are projected
to worsen and there
is uncertainty over
which sectors, where,
and to what extent,
will benefit from
new inter-basin water
transfers.
Downstream water users
impacted by small
informal reservoirs
upstream. There are
beneficial impacts
of policies unrelated
to drought but
aimed at reducing
vulnerabilities.
Involve different
expertise for
example, social
development,
agriculture, health,
public policy, climate
change, and local
actors to contribute
to reducing water use
conflicts.
Communication of
diagnosis should
be multi-level to all
actors and sectors
aiming to produce
timely information
for decision-making
before drought
impacts occur.
Requires expansion of
non-water-related
approaches to
reduce exposure
and vulnerability.
Policy coordination
and collaborative
agreements needed
across scales
and long-term
(considering climate
change) for water
allocation regarding
new inter-basin
transfers and for
managing water
demand.
Incomplete diagnosis
considers drought
drivers to be failed
rains, reliance on
rainfed agriculture,
desertification, and
poverty.
Insufficient
Insufficient
Insufficient
Existing measures to
reduce vulnerability
and provide
humanitarian aid
are insufficient and
inequitable; the
prognosis is that the
most vulnerable will
continue to be most
severely impacted.
Important drought
drivers also include
conflict, political
instability, and
numbers of displaced
persons especially
those in temporary
camps.
Should consider
societal impacts
of humanitarian
aid, transboundary
cooperation, and
environmental
rehabilitation.
Include both the
most vulnerable,
particularly
pastoralists, and
top-level government
ministers and
international
mediators.
Increase drought
monitoring and
establish drought
early warning
system. Ensure
the early warning
and subsequent
actions reach most
vulnerable.
Comprehensive and
collaborative
diagnosis would
likely indicate
that treatment
requires reversal
of environmental
degradation, conflict
resolution, and
political cooperation.
Note. For each case study, the traditional or historic misdiagnosis or incomplete diagnosis is presented above the dashed line and a direction toward comprehensive
drought diagnosis is presented below.
WALKER ET AL.
17 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
upstream irrigation schemes constructed in Ethiopia adversely affect water availability in Somalia though there
was no government in Somalia to engage with during their planning (Reliefweb, 2016).
Drought prevention and mitigation in the Horn of Africa requires substantial improvement to the health of the system rather than the current practice of inequitably distributed development and emergency relief. Treatment must
involve decreasing the number of vulnerable people. Diagnostic testing would likely show the need to reverse
environmental degradation, find political solutions to the ongoing conflicts, subsequently improve cross-border
collaboration to better manage transboundary water and pasture resources and population displacements, reduce
reliance on rainfed agriculture, and increase the density of hydroclimate monitoring.
3.5. Synthesis of Drought Case Studies
Table 2 synthesizes the case studies showing how the five steps of the drought diagnostic process have been
incompletely conducted or omitted. The table also suggests how a comprehensive and collaborative drought diagnosis could lead to improved treatment and drought prognosis. Despite the differences between the case studies,
a principle similarity in all cases is the need for societal changes, mostly involving equitable distribution of water
resources and rights, conflict resolution, and reducing the number of exposed and vulnerable livelihoods.
4. Discussion
The drought case studies illustrate that even though drought diagnoses have been conducted by researchers and
authorities to varying extents and solutions have been proposed, drought impacts are very likely to re-occur.
Until the drought diagnoses more comprehensively consider the full range of water users, their drought histories
including the causes of their vulnerabilities, the full range of drought impacts, and then collaboratively work
toward contextualized solutions, we will continue to see drought impacts felt most keenly by the most vulnerable.
The four case studies presented are representative of other drought-affected areas. Cape Town is not the only
city that has faced a “Day Zero” in recent years: São Paulo in 2015 was without water for 12 hr a day, forcing
the closure of many businesses and industries (Robins, 2019); Chennai in 2019 resorted to delivering 10 million
liters of water per day by train from a reservoir 360 km away, though it only fed the city's piped water system to
which the poorest do not have access (Trivedi & Chertock, 2019), and; Istanbul in 2021, with its reservoirs at
below 25% capacity, had the government resort to “pray for rain” ceremonies (McKernan, 2021). California is not
dissimilar to other high-income regions, such as southeast Spain and southeast Australia, where droughts, heat
waves and wildfires are becoming the new climate change-induced normal and policymakers attempt to balance
agricultural and environmental water needs (Cramer et al., 2018; Steffen et al., 2019). Brazil is akin to other large
countries, such as Mexico, China and India, all of which perceive the solution to drought to be inter-basin transfer
mega-projects delivering water from their wet regions to their drought-prone regions, often at great (and arguably
unsustainable) economic and environmental cost (Shumilova et al., 2018). Finally, there are other parts of the
world like the Horn of Africa where the same drought affects millions of people across numerous countries. For
example, parts of Central Asia and the Middle East similarly have great discrepancies in wealth and drought coping strategies between constituent countries, conflict-driven agricultural disruption and populations of IDPs, and
poor records in cross-border cooperation and pro-environmental policies (Mosello, 2008; Sowers et al., 2011).
The fact that droughts in these additional examples regularly make the news (PreventionWeb, 2021) suggests that
they could also have been used as misdiagnosis case studies.
The aim of this study is not to present a drought assessment methodology to replace existing guidance concerning
the three pillars of drought management and conducting drought risk assessments. Rather, the aim is to build on
that guidance. We present a complementary methodology encouraging greater interdisciplinary and multi-actor collaboration leading to more comprehensive diagnosis for improved and contextualized solutions. Drought
management plans are generally considered to have three components: 1. Monitoring and early warning; 2. Risk
and impact assessment, and; 3. Mitigation and response. The diagnostic steps presented in Section 2.2 show that
drought diagnosis contributes to the second and third pillars: risk and impact assessment to enable more effective
planning of mitigation and response. Additionally, while drought monitoring and early warning has received
a lot of attention, drought indicators and indices are mostly restricted to hydrometeorological anomalies with
little incorporation of drought impacts in the monitoring (Bachmair et al., 2016). Therefore, the comprehensive
and collaborative analysis of contextualized impacts means that drought diagnosis can contribute to this first
WALKER ET AL.
18 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
pillar of drought management planning by guiding selection of indicators for monitoring and early warning of
vulnerability to drought impacts, that is, to provide early warning of vulnerabilities so that they can be addressed
prior to drought occurrence. It is deliberate that an evaluation and history of drought impacts is the first step in
the diagnostic process—in the same way that a patient would firstly explain their symptoms—to emphasize that
drought diagnosis is coproduced with affected stakeholders for the purpose of preventing their drought impacts.
The key principles referring to the title of this article, “what the medical sciences can teach us” are:
1. Diagnosis is focused on finding a treatment, that is, drought diagnosis should be solutions-oriented rather than
aimed at increasing understanding only.
2. The starting points of a diagnosis are the symptoms and the patient's history, that is, acknowledgment that
drought is not a water problem, it is a society problem.
3. The emphasis on being patient-focused translates to the need for participatory methods and coproduction of
a diagnosis with stakeholders.
4. The diagnostic testing and consultation steps encourage interdisciplinarity and consideration of broader
drought drivers and actors not traditionally incorporated into drought assessment.
5. A systematic approach should be followed when conducting a diagnosis in order not to overlook any impacts,
causes, and potential treatments.
6. The unique combinations of causes and impacts require patient-specific (contextualized) treatment.
Our proposed approach complements though goes further than existing IDMP guidance by emphasizing the
need to look beyond hydrometeorology. In addition to water management interventions, options for dealing with
drought could involve programmes focusing on agriculture, education, financial support, conflict resolution, and
so on, or other initiatives that focus on causes of drought impacts rooted in inequality and injustice regarding
access to water and user rights. The approach is in accord with the #NoNaturalDisasters movement: “… whilst
some hazards are natural and unavoidable, the resulting disasters almost always have been made by human actions
and decisions,” which was recently supported by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) through the Sendai Framework (UNDRR, 2021a). The approach also responds to the “call to action” that
concludes the recent UNDRR Special Report on Drought (UNDRR, 2021b). Our diagnostic process accordingly
provides a “new tool for risk-informed decision-making” aiming to “better understand the causes of vulnerability
that are a function of human agency,” “draw on the long history of research and practices within the DRR community together with knowledge enshrined in traditional and indigenous wisdom,” “allow iterative learning and
innovation [in drought management],” and “build enabling conditions for the transition to drought-related, systemic risk governance.” In agreement with the recent IPCC (2021) report, proposed solutions may be grand and
difficult to enact but the consequences of inaction on society and ecosystems will be significant. Notwithstanding
the medical analogy, this is also akin to a systems approach and the discipline of sociohydrology in accepting
that we are part of complex dynamic and interacting systems and must look for long-term solutions (Clayton
& Radcliffe, 2018; Sivapalan et al., 2012). This is not to say that our diagnostic approach is only applicable at
large spatiotemporal scales; it would be equally applicable at municipality and village scales where treatments
with immediate benefits could be identified. Indeed, we would argue that multi-scale assessment and multi-scale
treatments are fundamental for drought risk reduction.
Medical diagnosis typically involves the same medical professional conducting the diagnosis and prescribing the
treatment. With a drought diagnosis, it is uncertain who the doctor is. This is another reason why drought is a
complex issue because there is no logical single person (or discipline or group), analogous to a general practitioner or family doctor, to conduct a drought diagnosis. The diagnostic process presented here therefore aims to guide
the various specialists, be they researchers, NGOs, politicians, water managers, disaster managers, or water users.
A drought diagnosis on the other hand may be conducted by researchers who then advise others who will make
decisions on treatment (ideally it would be conducted together). Therefore, it does not necessarily require a misdiagnosis or incomplete diagnosis to result in incorrect treatment; a comprehensive and contextualized drought
diagnosis with appropriate solutions may not be acted upon, for example, for cost, political, or cultural reasons.
Unfortunately, the medical sciences teach us that patients can disbelieve diagnoses and solutions (consider vaccinations), ignore warnings (e.g., smoking), or decide that no action is a better option (e.g., terminal patients). Just
as medical patients are entitled to accept or refuse treatment, drought-affected stakeholders may also choose not
to comply with drought preparedness, adaptation or mitigation solutions. Simply because it is not in their own
WALKER ET AL.
19 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
personal short-term or long-term interest, when there is competition over resources for instance. There could similarly be tension between individual and collective interests: a medical doctor usually advises a single patient with
one single interest whereas a drought-affected region includes large communities of affected individuals with
conflicting interests. Assuming that all stakeholder groups are represented, because drought is about a scarcity,
drought treatment and prevention are often about how to distribute this scarce good. Ethical considerations are
thus unavoidable: Who gets what at the expense of whom? Is the aim to minimize suffering (following Bentham's
principle, and then, what is considered suffering?) or minimize economic loss? Even if a drought diagnosis could
be thoroughly comprehensive, in terms of information and actors, distributing a scarce good means disappointing
some and making ethical choices. The question of who has the legitimacy to make this choice also remains unanswered in the field of medicine. An analogy is providing a very expensive treatment to one person, at the expense
of many cheaper treatments to many others; is this the decision of the doctor or is this legislation?
The consultation step of the diagnostic process, and the emphasis on the process being collaborative, are therefore crucial. Drought diagnosis and subsequent treatment should be coproduced by an interdisciplinary team of
drought researchers, the policymakers and decision-makers, and representatives of the full range of actors and
drought-affected stakeholders. Participatory methods that incorporate the expertise and perspectives of all interested groups should lead to building of mutual trust, confidence, and respect (Walker et al., 2021), resulting in
appropriate and acceptable drought treatment for all those involved.
5. Conclusions
Using analogies with medical sciences can be helpful toward comprehensively diagnosing droughts for a variety of contexts. Identifying misdiagnosis and assessing the effectiveness of proposed interventions (treatment,
prognosis) could help drought managers be more proactive and help drought-affected regions become more
drought-prepared in the future. The proposed approach for drought diagnosis provides a conceptual framework to
support scientists and policymakers to go beyond existing guidance for achieving integrated drought management
objectives.
Data Availability Statement
This paper utilizes existing published material and does not analyse any new data.
Acknowledgments
This study forms part of the project:
“3DDD: Diagnosing drought for dealing
with drought in 3D,” funded by the Dutch
Research Council (NWO) under grant
W07.30318.016 and the Interdisciplinary
Research and Education Fund (INREF) of
Wageningen University, the Netherland.
WALKER ET AL.
References
AghaKouchak, A., Cheng, L., Mazdiyasni, O., & Farahmand, A. (2014). Global warming and changes in risk of concurrent climate extremes:
Insights from the 2014 California drought. Geophysical Research Letters, 41(24), 8847–8852.
AghaKouchak, A., Mirchi, A., Madani, K., Di Baldassarre, G., Nazemi, A., Alborzi, A., et al. (2021). Anthropogenic drought: Definition, challenges and opportunities. Reviews of Geophysics, 59(2), e2019RG000683.
Arcanjo, M. (2020). Water security in the Horn of Africa: Climate change in Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Djibouti. Retrieved from https://
climate.org/water-security-in-the-horn-of-africa-climate-change-in-somalia-ethiopia-eritrea-and-djibouti/
Arsky, I. D. C. (2020). Os efeitos do Programa Cisternas no acesso à água no semiárido. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 55. https://doi.
org/10.5380/dma.v55i0.73378
Attwater, W. R., & Markle, J. (1987). Overview of California water rights and water quality law. Pacific Basin Law Journal, 19, 957.
Bachmair, S., Stahl, K., Collins, K., Hannaford, J., Acreman, M., Svoboda, M., et al. (2016). Drought indicators revisited: The need for a wider
consideration of environment and society. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 3(4), 516–536.
Balogh, E. P., Miller, B. T., & Ball, J. R. (2015). Improving diagnosis in health care. Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press.
Barlow, M., & Clarke, T. (2017). Blue gold: The battle against corporate theft of the world’s water. Routledge.
Beck, H. E., Zimmermann, N. E., McVicar, T. R., Vergopolan, N., Berg, A., & Wood, E. F. (2018). Present and future Köppen-Geiger climate
classification maps at 1-km resolution. Scientific Data, 5(1), 1–12.
Bedran-Martins, A. M., & Lemos, M. C. (2017). Politics of drought under Bolsa Família program in Northeast Brazil. World Development
Perspectives, 7–8, 15–21.
Berg, N., & Hall, A. (2017). Anthropogenic warming impacts on California snowpack during drought. Geophysical Research Letters, 44(5),
2511–2518.
Blauhut, V. (2020). The triple complexity of drought risk analysis and its visualisation via mapping: A review across scales and sectors. Earth-Science Reviews, 103345.
Bloomfield, J. P., Marchant, B. P., & McKenzie, A. A. (2019). Changes in groundwater drought associated with anthropogenic warming. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 23(3), 1393–1408.
Boretti, A., & Rosa, L. (2019). Reassessing the projections of the World Water Development Report. npj Clean Water, 2(1), 15.
Botai, C. M., Botai, J. O., De Wit, J. P., Ncongwane, K. P., & Adeola, A. M. (2017). Drought characteristics over the Western Cape province,
South Africa. Water, 9(11), 876.
20 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Brito, S. S. B., Cunha, A. P. M., Cunningham, C., Alvalá, R. C., Marengo, J. A., & Carvalho, M. A. (2018). Frequency, duration and severity of
drought in the Semiarid Northeast Brazil region. International Journal of Climatology, 38(2), 517–529.
Brooks, N., Adger, W. N., & Kelly, P. M. (2005). The determinants of vulnerability and adaptive capacity at the national level and the implications
for adaptation. Global Environmental Change, 15(2), 151–163.
Carrão, H., Naumann, G., & Barbosa, P. (2016). Mapping global patterns of drought risk: An empirical framework based on sub-national estimates of hazard, exposure and vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 39, 108–124.
Cavalcante, L., Mesquita, P. S., & Rodrigues-Filho, S. (2020). 2nd Water Cisterns: Social technologies promoting adaptive capacity to Brazilian
family farmers. Desenvolvimento e Meio Ambiente, 55.
CDFA. (2020). California agricultural production statistics. California Department of Food and Agriculture. Retrieved from https://www.cdfa.
ca.gov/Statistics/#:∼:text=California%20agricultural%20exports%20totaled%20%2421.7,%2C%20Davis%2C%20Agricultural%20Issues%20
Center
CEIC. (2017). Brazil Gini coefficient: Household income: By region. Retrieved from https://www.ceicdata.com/en/brazil/
gini-coefficient-household-income-by-region
Chaussard, E., Milillo, P., Bürgmann, R., Perissin, D., Fielding, E. J., & Baker, B. (2017). Remote sensing of ground deformation for monitoring
groundwater management practices: Application to the Santa Clara Valley during the 2012–2015 California drought. Journal of Geophysical
Research: Solid Earth, 122(10), 8566–8582.
Christian-Smith, J., Levy, M., Gleick, P. H., Ross, N., & Luu, P. (2011). Impacts of the California drought from 2007 to 2009. Pacific Institute.
Clayton, A. M., & Radcliffe, N. J. (2018). Sustainability: A systems approach. Routledge.
COCT. (2020). Our shared water future: Cape Town's water strategy. City of Cape Town (COCT). Retrieved from https://www.capetown.gov.
za/general/cape-town-water-strategy
Cohen, J. S., Zeff, H. B., & Herman, J. D. (2020). Adaptation of multiobjective reservoir operations to snowpack decline in the western United
States. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 146(12), 04020091.
Collins. (2021). Collins Dictionary definition of diagnosis. Retrieved from https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/diagnosis
Cramer, W., Guiot, J., Fader, M., Garrabou, J., Gattuso, J.-P., Iglesias, A., et al. (2018). Climate change and interconnected risks to sustainable
development in the Mediterranean. Nature Climate Change, 8(11), 972–980.
de Araújo, J. C., & Bronstert, A. (2016). A method to assess hydrological drought in semi-arid environments and its application to the Jaguaribe
River basin, Brazil. Water International, 41(2), 213–230.
Detges, A. (2016). Local conditions of drought-related violence in sub-Saharan Africa: The role of road and water infrastructures. Journal of
Peace Research, 53(5), 696–710.
Di Baldassarre, G., Mazzoleni, M., & Rusca, M. (2021). The legacy of large dams in the United States. Ambio.
Diffenbaugh, N. S., Swain, D. L., & Touma, D. (2015). Anthropogenic warming has increased drought risk in California. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112(13), 3931–3936.
DWS. (2018). Water outlook 2018 report. Revision 25 - updated 20 May 2018, Produced by Department of Water and Sanitation, City of
Cape Town. Retrieved from https://resource.capetown.gov.za/documentcentre/Documents/City%20research%20reports%20and%20review/
Water%20Outlook%202018%20-%20Summary.pdf
Eakin, H. C., Lemos, M. C., & Nelson, D. R. (2014). Differentiating capacities as a means to sustainable climate change adaptation. Global
Environmental Change, 27, 1–8.
Enqvist, J., Ziervogel, G., Metelerkamp, L., van Breda, J., Dondi, N., Lusithi, T., et al. (2020). Informality and water justice: Community perspectives on water issues in cape Town’s low-income neighbourhoods. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 1–22.
Fagundes, A. A., Silva, T. C., Voci, S. M., Dos Santos, F., Barbosa, K. B. F., & Corrêa, A. M. S. (2020). Food and nutritional security of semi-arid
farm families benefiting from rainwater collection equipment in Brazil. PLOS One, 15(7), e0234974.
FAO. (2019). Proactive approaches to drought preparedness—Where are we now and where do we go from here?. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
Farah, K., Nyariki, D., Noor, A., Ngugi, R., & Musimba, N. (2003). The socio-economic and ecological impacts of small-scale irrigation schemes
on pastoralists and drylands in Northern Kenya. Journal of Social Sciences, 7(4), 267–274.
Faunt, C. C., Sneed, M., Traum, J., & Brandt, J. T. (2016). Water availability and land subsidence in the Central Valley, California, USA. Hydrogeology Journal, 24(3), 675–684.
Feng, X., Porporato, A., & Rodriguez-Iturbe, I. (2013). Changes in rainfall seasonality in the tropics. Nature Climate Change, 3(9), 811–815.
Forbes. (2020). Best states for business 2019 – California. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/places/ca/?sh=6cf8cb3d3fef
Fratkin, E. (2014). Ethiopia's pastoralist policies: Development, displacement and resettlement. Nomadic Peoples, 18(1), 94–114.
FUNCEME. (2021). Mapping of the dams of small reservoirs in the state of Ceará (Technical Report), (pp. 10). FUNCEME (Fundação Cearense
de Meteorologia e Recursos Hídricos).
Funk, C. (2020). Ethiopia, Somalia and Kenya face devastating drought. Nature, 586(7831), 645.
Gandhi, J. (2000). Re: William Osler: A life in medicine. BMJ, 321, 1087.
Ghebrezgabher, M. G., Yang, T., & Yang, X. (2016). Long-term trend of climate change and drought assessment in the Horn of Africa. Advances
in Meteorology, 2016.
Gleick, P. H. (2015). Impacts of California’s ongoing drought: Hydroelectricity generation. Pacific Institute.
Gondim, R., Silveira, C., de Souza Filho, F., Vasconcelos, F., & Cid, D. (2018). Climate change impacts on water demand and availability using
CMIP5 models in the Jaguaribe basin, semi-arid Brazil. Environmental Earth Sciences, 77(15), 1–14.
Grafton, R. Q., Williams, J., Perry, C. J., Molle, F., Ringler, C., Steduto, P., et al. (2018). The paradox of irrigation efficiency. Science, 361(6404),
748–750.
Grantham, T. E., & Viers, J. H. (2014). 100 years of California’s water rights system: Patterns, trends and uncertainty. Environmental Research
Letters, 9(8), 084012.
Greenfield, G. M. (2001). The realities of images: Imperial Brazil and the Great Drought. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society,
91(1), ii–148.
GroundUp. (2021). Facts and myths about Cape Town’s water crisis. GroundUp. Retrieved from https://www.groundup.org.za/article/
facts-and-myths-about-cape-towns-water-crisis/
Gutiérrez, A. P. A., Engle, N. L., De Nys, E., Molejón, C., & Martins, E. S. (2014). Drought preparedness in Brazil. Weather and Climate Extremes, 3, 95–106.
Hagenlocher, M., Meza, I., Anderson, C. C., Min, A., Renaud, F. G., Walz, Y., et al. (2019). Drought vulnerability and risk assessments: State of
the art, persistent gaps, and research agenda. Environmental Research Letters, 14(8), 083002.
WALKER ET AL.
21 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Haile, G. G., Tang, Q., Li, W., Liu, X., & Zhang, X. (2020). Drought: Progress in broadening its understanding. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Water, 7(2), e1407.
Haile, G. G., Tang, Q., Sun, S., Huang, Z., Zhang, X., & Liu, X. (2019). Droughts in East Africa: Causes, impacts and resilience. Earth-Science
Reviews, 193, 146–161.
Herwehe, L., & Scott, C. A. (2018). Drought adaptation and development: Small-scale irrigated agriculture in Northeast Brazil. Climate & Development, 10(4), 337–346.
Huning, L. S., & AghaKouchak, A. (2020). Global snow drought hot spots and characteristics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, 117(33), 19753–19759.
IDMP. (2014). National drought management policy guidelines: A template for action, (D.A. Whilhite). Integrated Drought Management Programme (IDMP) Tools and Guidelines Series 1. World Meteorological Organization (WMO); Global Water Partnership (GWP).
IDMP. (2016). Handbook of drought indicators and indices. In M. Svoboda, & B. A. Fuchs (Eds.) Integrated Drought Management Programme
(IDMP) Tools and Guidelines Series 2. World Meteorological Organization (WMO); Global Water Partnership (GWP).
IDMP. (2017). Benefits of action and costs of inaction: Drought mitigation and preparedness—A literature review. In N. Gerber, & A. Mirzabaev
(Eds.), Integrated Drought Management Programme (IDMP) Working Paper 1. World Meteorological Organization (WMO);Global Water
Partnership (GWP).
IGAD. (2007). IGAD environment and natural resources strategy. InterGovernmental Authority on Development.
IPCC. (2014). Climate change 2014 – Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Part A: Global and sectoral aspects. Contribution of working group
II to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In C. B. Field, V. R. Barros, D. J. Dokken, K. J. Mach,
M. D. Mastrandrea, T. E. Bilir, et al. (Eds.) Cambridge University Press.
IPCC. (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S. L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, et al. (Eds.). Cambridge University
Press.
Johnson, R., & Cody, B. A. (2015). California agricultural production and irrigated water use. Congressional Research Service.
Kairu, G. (2021). Drought and people’s livelihood in the Horn of Africa. GAR Special Report on Drought 2021. UNDRR.
Kallis, G. (2008). Droughts. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.environ.33.081307.123117
Kassawmar, T., Zeleke, G., Bantider, A., Gessesse, G. D., & Abraha, L. (2018). A synoptic land change assessment of Ethiopia's Rainfed Agricultural Area for evidence-based agricultural ecosystem management. Heliyon, 4(11), e00914.
Kchouk, S., Melsen, L. A., Walker, D. W., & van Oel, P. R. (2021). A review of drought indices: Predominance of drivers over impacts and the
importance of local context. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences Discussions.
Kempe, C. H., Silverman, F. N., Steele, B. F., Droegemueller, W., & Silver, H. K. (1962). The battered-child syndrome. JAMA, 181(1), 17–24.
King-Okumu, C., Tsegai, D., Pandey, R. P., & Rees, G. (2020). Less to lose? Drought impact and vulnerability assessment in disadvantaged
regions. Water, 12(4), 1136.
Kioko, M. J. (2013). Who stole the rain? The case of recent severe droughts in Kenya. European Scientific Journal, 9(5).
Lund, J., Medellin-Azuara, J., Durand, J., & Stone, K. (2018). Lessons from California’s 2012–2016 drought. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 144(10), 04018067.
Machado, L. W., & Rovere, E. L. L. (2018). The traditional technological approach and social technologies in the Brazilian semiarid region.
Sustainability, 10(1), 25.
Magalhães, A. R. (2017). "Life and drought in Brazil." Drought in Brazil: Proactive management and policy (pp. 1–19). Chapman and Hall/CRC.
Mann, M. E., & Gleick, P. H. (2015). Climate change and California drought in the 21st century. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, 112(13), 3858–3859.
Martins, E. S. P. R., & Magalhães, A. R. (2015). A seca de 2012–2015 no Nordeste e seus impactos. Parceiros Estratégicos, 20, 107–128.
Martins, E. S. P. R., & Reis Junior, D. S. (2021). Drought impacts and policy responses in Brazil: The case of the Northeast Region. GAR Special
Report on Drought 2021. UNDRR.
Matthews, S. (2005). What next for Western Cape water? Urban water supply. The Water Wheel, 4(4), 20–21.
McCarthy, J. (2018). The world’s first ‘water police’are handing out fines in this city. Global Citizen. Retrieved from https://www.globalcitizen.
org/en/content/cape-town-worlds-first-water-police/
McDonald, D. A. (2012). World city syndrome: Neoliberalism and inequality in Cape Town. Routledge.
McKernan, B. (2021). Turkey drought: Istanbul could run out of water in 45 days. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/
world/2021/jan/13/turkey-drought-istanbul-run-out-water-45-days
Medeiros, P., & Sivapalan, M. (2020). From hard-path to soft-path solutions: Slow–fast dynamics of human adaptation to droughts in a water
scarce environment. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 65(11), 1803–1814.
Mengisteab, K. (2012). Environmental degradation in the greater horn of Africa. Predicaments in the Horn of Africa, 447.
Menkhaus, K. (2012). No access: Critical bottlenecks in the 2011 Somali famine. Global Food Security, 1(1), 29–35.
Mesquita, P., & Milhorance, C. (2019). Facing food security and climate change adaptation in semi-arid regions: Lessons from the Brazilian Food
Acquisition Program. Revista XIX, 10(1), 30–42.
Mesquita, P., Theophilo Folhes, R., Cavalcante, L., de Novais Rodrigues, L. V., Abreu Santose, B., & Rodrigues-Filho, S. (2020). Impacts of the
Fomento program on family farmers in the Brazilian semi-arid region and its relevance to climate change: A case study in the region of Sub
medio São Francisco. Sustainability in Debate/Sustentabilidade em Debate, 11(1).
Meza, I., Siebert, S., Döll, P., Kusche, J., Herbert, C., Eyshi Rezaei, E., et al. (2020). Global-scale drought risk assessment for agricultural systems. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 20(2), 695–712.
Mosello, B. (2008). Water in Central Asia: A prospect of conflict or cooperation? Journal of Public and International Affairs, 19.
Mount, J., & Hanak, E. (2016). Water use in California. Public Policy Institute of California.
Muller, J. C.-Y. (2014). Adapting to climate change and addressing drought–learning from the Red Cross Red Crescent experiences in the Horn
of Africa. Weather and Climate Extremes, 3, 31–36.
Muller, M. (2018). Cape Town’s drought: Don’t blame climate change. Nature, 559, 174–176.
Muller, M. (2020). Some systems perspectives on demand management during Cape Town’s 2015–2018 water crisis. International Journal of
Water Resources Development, 36(6), 1054–1072.
ND-GAIN. (2018). Notre Dame global adaptation initiative: Country index. Retrieved from https://gain-new.crc.nd.edu/ranking
Nelson, T., Chou, H., Zikalala, P., Lund, J., Hui, R., & Medellín–Azuara, J. (2016). Economic and water supply effects of ending groundwater
overdraft in California's Central Valley. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 14(1).
Nicholson, S. E. (2014). A detailed look at the recent drought situation in the Greater Horn of Africa. Journal of Arid Environments, 103, 71–79.
WALKER ET AL.
22 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
NIDIS. (2021). In Drought in California. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA's) National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) Program. Retrieved from https://www.drought.gov/states/california#historical-conditions
Nour Ayeh, M., Mahamoud, A., Saad, O., Camberlin, P., Gemenne, F., De Longueville, F., et al. (2014). Importance of recent extreme weather
variation in Djibouti and need for impact quantification.
Null, S. E., & Prudencio, L. (2016). Climate change effects on water allocations with season dependent water rights. The Science of the Total
Environment, 571, 943–954.
OEC. (2019). The observatory of economic complexity. Retrieved from https://oec.world/en/profile/country/dji
Otto, F. E., Wolski, P., Lehner, F., Tebaldi, C., Van Oldenborgh, G. J., Hogesteeger, S., et al. (2018). Anthropogenic influence on the drivers of
the Western Cape drought 2015–2017. Environmental Research Letters, 13(12), 124010.
Owen, D. (2017). Where the water goes: Life and death along the Colorado river. Riverside Press.
Parks, R., Mclaren, M., Toumi, R., & Rivett, U. (2019). Experiences and Lessons in Managing Water from Cape Town (Vol. 29). Grantham
Institute Briefing Paper.
Perry, D. M., & Praskievicz, S. J. (2017). A new era of big infrastructure?(Re) developing water storage in the US west in the context of climate
change and environmental regulation. Water Alternatives, 10(2).
Poděbradská, M., Noel, M., Bathke, D. J., Haigh, T. R., & Hayes, M. J. (2020). Ready for drought? A community resilience role-playing game.
Water, 12(9), 2490.
Pontes Filho, J. D., Souza Filho, F. d. A., Martins, E. S. P. R., & Studart, T. M. d. C. (2020). Copula-based multivariate frequency analysis of the
2012–2018 drought in Northeast Brazil. Water, 12(3), 834.
PreventionWeb. (2021). Knowledge Base – News – Search term: Drought. In The knowledge base for disaster risk reduction. Retrieved from https://www.
preventionweb.net/news/list/#query=drought&hits=20&sortby=default&view=pw&filter=unisdrcontenttype%3A%5E%22News%22%24
Prinsloo, K. (2017). Drought in Somalia: Time is running out. Al Jazeera.
Purkey, D. R., Huber-Lee, A., Yates, D. N., Hanemann, M., & Herrod-Julius, S. (2007). Integrating a climate change assessment tool into stakeholder-driven water management decision-making processes in California. Water Resources Management, 21(1), 315–329.
Qu, C., Hao, X., & Qu, J. J. (2019). Monitoring extreme agricultural drought over the Horn of Africa (HOA) using remote sensing measurements.
Remote Sensing, 11(8), 902.
Reliefweb. (2016). The Juba and Shabelle rivers and their importance to Somalia. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian
Affairs (UN, OCHA). Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/report/somalia/juba-and-shabelle-rivers-and-their-importance-somalia
Reliefweb. (2020). Ethiopia National Displacement Report 6, Round 23: August–September 2020. United Nations Office for the Coordination
of Humanitarian Affairs (UN, OCHA). Retrieved from https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/ethiopia-national-displacement-report-6-round23-august-september-2020
Reliefweb. (2021). Somalia: Drought – 2015-2021. United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (UN, OCHA). Retrieved
from https://reliefweb.int/disaster/dr-2015-000134-som
Ribeiro Neto, G. G., Melsen, L. A., Martins, E. S. P. R., Walker, D. W., & Van Oel, P. R. (2021). Drought Cycle Analysis to evaluate the influence
of small reservoirs on drought evolution. Water Resources Research, 58, e2021WR030799.
Rivera-Torres, M., & Gerlak, A. K. (2021). Evolving together: Transboundary water governance in the Colorado River Basin. International
Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, 1–22.
Robins, S. (2019). ‘Day Zero’, hydraulic citizenship and the defence of the commons in Cape Town: A case study of the politics of water and its
infrastructures (2017–2018). Journal of Southern African Studies, 45(1), 5–29.
Roman, P. (2017). The São Francisco inter-basin water transfer in Brazil: Tribulations of a megaproject through constraints and controversy.
Water Alternatives, 10(2), 395.
Santana, V. L., & Arsky, I. d. C. (2016). Aprendizado e inovação no desenho de regras para a implementação de políticas públicas: A experiência
do Programa Cisternas. Revista do Serviço Público, 67(2), 203–226.
Saunderson-Meyer, W. (2018). Commentary: In drought-hit South Africa, the politics of water. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/
article/us-saundersonmeyer-drought-commentary/commentary-in-drought-hit-south-africa-the-politics-of-water-idUSKBN1FP226
Savelli, E., Rusca, M., Cloke, H., & Di Baldassarre, G. (2021). Don’t blame the rain: Social power and the 2015-2017 drought in Cape Town.
Journal of Hydrology, 125953.
Scanlon, B. R., Longuevergne, L., & Long, D. (2012). Ground referencing GRACE satellite estimates of groundwater storage changes in the
California Central Valley, USA. Water Resources Research, 48(4).
Sena, A., Freitas, C., Souza, P. F., Carneiro, F., Alpino, T., Pedroso, M., et al. (2018). Drought in the semiarid region of Brazil: Exposure, vulnerabilities and health impacts from the perspectives of local actors. PLOS currents, 10.
Sheffield, J., & Wood, E. F. (2008). Projected changes in drought occurrence under future global warming from multi-model, multi-scenario,
IPCC AR4 simulations. Climate Dynamics, 31(1), 79–105.
Shiferaw, B., Tesfaye, K., Kassie, M., Abate, T., Prasanna, B., & Menkir, A. (2014). Managing vulnerability to drought and enhancing livelihood
resilience in sub-Saharan Africa: Technological, institutional and policy options. Weather and Climate Extremes, 3, 67–79.
Shi, H., Jiang, Z., Zhao, B., Li, Z., Chen, Y., Gu, Y., et al. (2019). Modeling study of the air quality impact of record-breaking Southern California
wildfires in December 2017. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 124(12), 6554–6570.
Shumilova, O., Tockner, K., Thieme, M., Koska, A., & Zarfl, C. (2018). Global water transfer megaprojects: A potential solution for the water-food-energy nexus? Frontiers in Environmental Science, 6(150).
Silva, R. M. A. D. (2003). Entre dois paradigmas: Combate à seca e convivência com o semi-árido. Sociedade e Estado, 18, 361–385.
Sivapalan, M., Savenije, H. H., & Blöschl, G. (2012). Socio-hydrology: A new science of people and water. Hydrological Processes, 26(8),
1270–1276.
Smirnov, O., Zhang, M., Xiao, T., Orbell, J., Lobben, A., & Gordon, J. (2016). The relative importance of climate change and population growth
for exposure to future extreme droughts. Climatic Change, 138(1), 41–53.
SOC. (2021). State water project. State of California. Retrieved https://water.ca.gov/Programs/State-Water-Project
Sousa, P. M., Blamey, R. C., Reason, C. J., Ramos, A. M., & Trigo, R. M. (2018). The ‘Day Zero’ Cape Town drought and the poleward migration
of moisture corridors. Environmental Research Letters, 13(12), 124025.
Sowers, J., Vengosh, A., & Weinthal, E. (2011). Climate change, water resources, and the politics of adaptation in the Middle East and North
Africa. Climatic Change, 104(3), 599–627.
Spinoni, J., Barbosa, P., Bucchignani, E., Cassano, J., Cavazos, T., Christensen, J. H., et al. (2020). Future global meteorological drought hot
spots: A study based on CORDEX data. Journal of Climate, 33(9), 3635–3661.
StatsSA. (2019). Inequality trends in South Africa: A multidimensional diagnostic of inequality. Statistics South Africa.
Steffen, W., Hughes, L., Mullins, G., Bambrick, H., Dean, A., & Rice, M. (2019). Dangerous summer: Escalating bushfire, heat and drought risk.
WALKER ET AL.
23 of 24
Earth’s Future
10.1029/2021EF002456
Stern, C., & Sheikh, P. (2020). Management of the Colorado River: Water allocations, drought, and the federal role. Congressional Research
Service Report 45546.
Stewart, I. T., Rogers, J., & Graham, A. (2020). Water security under severe drought and climate change: Disparate impacts of the recent severe
drought on environmental flows and water supplies in Central California. Journal of Hydrology X, 7, 100054.
Stokstad, E. (2020). Droughts exposed California’s thirst for groundwater. Now, the state hopes to refill its aquifers. Retrieved from https://www.
science.org/news/2020/04/droughts-exposed-california-s-thirst-groundwater-now-state-hopes-refill-its-aquifers
SUDENE. (2017). Superintendência do Desenvolvimento do Nordeste. RESOLUÇÃO N º 107/2017, de 27 de julho de 2017." Estabelece critérios técnicos e científicos para delimitação do Semiárido Brasileiro e procedimentos para revisão de sua abrangência. Conselho Deliberativo.
Retrieved from RESOLUÇÃO Nº 115, DE 23 de novembro de 2017 – Imprensa Nacional (in.gov.br).
Swain, D. L. (2021). A shorter, sharper rainy season amplifies California wildfire risk. Geophysical Research Letters, e2021GL092843.
Thomas, B. F., Famiglietti, J. S., Landerer, F. W., Wiese, D. N., Molotch, N. P., & Argus, D. F. (2017). GRACE Groundwater Drought Index:
Evaluation of California Central Valley groundwater drought. Remote Sensing of Environment, 198, 384–392.
Thomas, E., Jordan, E., Linden, K., Mogesse, B., Hailu, T., Jirma, H., et al. (2020). Reducing drought emergencies in the Horn of Africa. The
Science of the Total Environment, 727, 138772.
Trivedi, A., & Chertock, M. (2019). Responding to day zero equitably: Water crisis lessons from Cape Town and Chennai. Retrieved from https://
www.wri.org/insights/responding-day-zero-equitably-water-crisis-lessons-cape-town-and-chennai
UNDP. (2020). Human Development Report (2020): Latest Human Development Index Ranking. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/
latest-human-development-index-ranking
UNDRR. (2021a). SENDAI FRAMEWORK 6th ANNIVERSARY: Time to recognize there is no such thing as a natural disaster - we're doing it to ourselves. United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction Press Release. Retrieved from https://www.undrr.org/news/
sendai-framework-6th-anniversary-time-recognize-there-no-such-thing-natural-disaster-were
UNDRR. (2021b). GAR Special Report on Drought 2021. Switzerland.
UNHCR. (2021). Somalia refugee crisis explained. Retrieved from https://www.unrefugees.org/news/somalia-refugee-crisis-explained/
US Census Bureau. (2012). Growth in urban population outpaces rest of nation, Census Bureau Reports. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/
newsroom/releases/archives/2010_census/cb12-50.html
US Census Bureau. (2019). Gini index of income inequality. Retrieved from https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B19083&g=0100000US.04
000.001&tid=ACSDT1Y2019.B19083&hidePreview=true
US Forest Service. (2019). U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Forest Health Protection Aerial Detection Survey. Retrieved from
https://www.fs.usda.gov/detail/r5/forest-grasslandhealth/?cid=fsbdev3_046696
van Langen, S. C., Costa, A. C., Ribeiro Neto, G. G., & van Oel, P. R. (2021). Effect of a reservoir network on drought propagation in a semi-arid
catchment in Brazil. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 66(10), 1567–1583.
Van Loon, A. F., Stahl, K., Di Baldassarre, G., Clark, J., Rangecroft, S., Wanders, N., et al. (2016). Drought in a human-modified world: Reframing drought definitions, understanding, and analysis approaches. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 20, 3631–3650.
van Oel, P. R., Martins, E. S., Costa, A. C., Wanders, N., & van Lanen, H. A. (2018). Diagnosing drought using the downstreamness concept: The
effect of reservoir networks on drought evolution. Hydrological Sciences Journal, 63(7), 979–990.
Walker, D. W., Forsythe, N., Parkin, G., & Gowing, J. (2016). Filling the observational void: Scientific value and quantitative validation of hydrometeorological data from a community-based monitoring programme. Journal of Hydrology, 538, 713–725.
Walker, D. W., Smigaj, M., & Tani, M. (2021). The benefits and negative impacts of citizen science applications to water as experienced by
participants and communities. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Water, 8(1), e1488.
Wanders, N., Bachas, A., He, X. G., Huang, H., Koppa, A., Mekonnen, Z. T., et al. (2017). Forecasting the hydroclimatic signature of the 2015/16
El Niño event on the western United States. Journal of Hydrometeorology, 18(1), 177–186.
Wanders, N., & Wada, Y. (2015). Human and climate impacts on the 21st century hydrological drought. Journal of Hydrology, 526, 208–220.
Water Education Foundation. (2021). California water issues overview. Retrieved from https://www.watereducation.org/aquapedia/
california-water-issues-overview
Wester, P. (2008). Shedding the waters: Institutional change and water control in the Lerma-Chapala basin, Mexico (PhD thesis). (pp. 314).
Wageningen University.
WHO. (2016). Diagnostic errors: Technical series on safer primary care. World Health Organisation.
Wilhite, D. A. (2000). Preparing for drought: A methodology. In D. Wilhite (Ed.), Drought: A global assessment. (Vol 2, pp. 89–104). Routledge
Hazards Disaster Ser.
Wilhite, D. A., & Pulwarty, R. S. (2005). Drought and water crises: Lessons learned and the road ahead. Drought and water crises: Science,
technology, and management issues (pp. 389–398). https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420028386.pt4
Wilhite, D. A., Sivakumar, M. V. K., & Pulwarty, R. S. (2014). Managing drought risk in a changing climate: The role of national drought policy.
Weather and Climate Extremes, 3, 4–13.
Wilhite, D. A., Svoboda, M. D., & Hayes, M. J. (2007). Understanding the complex impacts of drought: A key to enhancing drought mitigation
and preparedness. Water Resources Management, 21(5), 763–774.
Winder, M., Jassby, A. D., & Mac Nally, R. (2011). Synergies between climate anomalies and hydrological modifications facilitate estuarine
biotic invasions. Ecology Letters, 14(8), 749–757.
Wolski, P. (2018). How severe is Cape Town's “Day Zero” drought? Significance, 15(2), 24–27.
World Bank. (2019). Assessing drought hazard and risk: Principles and implementation guidance. World Bank.
World Bank. (2020). From Isolation to integration: The Borderlands of the Horn of Africa. World Bank.
World Bank. (2021a). Population growth. World bank open data; Free and open access to global development data. Retrieved from https://data.
worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.GROW
World Bank. (2021b). Gini index (World Bank estimate). Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI
World Population Review. (2021). World population review. Retrieved from https://worldpopulationreview.com/
Wu, Y., Arapi, A., Huang, J., Gross, B., & Moshary, F. (2018). Intra-continental wildfire smoke transport and impact on local air quality observed
by ground-based and satellite remote sensing in New York City. Atmospheric Environment, 187, 266–281.
WALKER ET AL.
24 of 24