4.7 Article

Quantifying the Relative Contribution of Climate and Human Impacts on Runoff Change Based on the Budyko Hypothesis and SVM Model

Journal

WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Volume 30, Issue 7, Pages 2377-2390

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11269-016-1286-x

Keywords

The heuristic segmentation method; The Budyko hypothesis; Support vector machine; The wei river basin

Funding

  1. National Department Public Benefit Research Foundation of Ministry of Water Resources [201501058]
  2. National Major Fundamental Research Program [2011CB403306-2]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Wei River Basin (WRB), the largest tributary of the Yellow River in China, has experienced a noticeable decrease in annual runoff during the last 50 years. Quantifying the relative contributions of climate change and human activities on runoff changes is thus important for local water resources management and sustainable water resources utilizations. In this study, the heuristic segmentation method was first adopted to detect the change points of annual runoff at Linjiacun and Huaxian stations which lies in the middle and lower reaches of the basin, respectively. Then, the Budyko hypothesis and SVM-based model were applied to attribute the detected runoff changes to climate change and human activities. Results showed that: (1) two change points were detected for the annual runoff at the Linjiacun station (1971 and 1993), and Huaxian station (1969 and 1993); (2) based on the Budyko hypothesis, the relative contributions of climate change and human activities to runoff changes at Linjiacun and Huaxian stations are 42.2 %, 57.8 % and 30.5 %, 69.8 %, respectively, whilst those based on the SVM-based model are 45.3 %, 54.7 % and 34.7 %, 65.3 %, respectively. The high consistence between the two approaches indicates that human activities are the dominate factor on historical runoff changes in the WRB.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available