4.2 Article

Integrated assessment of the impacts of climate variability and anthropogenic activities on river runoff: a case study in the Hutuo River Basin, China

期刊

HYDROLOGY RESEARCH
卷 48, 期 2, 页码 416-430

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/nh.2016.229

关键词

environmental change; integrated assessment; interactive effect; runoff; SWAT

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51379057]
  2. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2015B14114]
  3. National 'Ten Thousand Program' Youth Talent, QingLan Project
  4. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (PAPD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Understanding the linear and nonlinear responses of runoff to environmental change is crucial to optimally manage water resources in river basins. This study proposes a generic framework-based hydrological model (Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT)) and two approaches, to comprehensively assess the impacts of anthropogenic activities and climate variability on runoff over the representative Hutuo River Basin (HRB), China. Results showed that SWAT performed well in capturing the runoff trend in HRB; however, it exhibited better performance for the calibration period than for the validation. During 1961-2000, about 26.06% of the catchment area was changed, mainly from forest to farmland and urban, and the climate changed to warmer and drier. The integrated effects of the anthropogenic activities and climate variability decreased annual runoff in HRB by 96.6 mm. Direct human activities were responsible for 52.16% of runoff reduction. Climate (land use) decreased runoff by 45.30% (2.06%), whereas the combined (land use + climate) impact resulted in more runoff decrease, by 47.84%. Land use-climate interactive effect is inherent in HRB and decreased runoff by 1.02%. The proposed framework can be applied to improve the current understanding of runoff variation in river basins, for supporting sustainable water resources management strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据