3

Meteorological Drought
Indices: Definitions

Nicolas R. Dalezios 3.1 Introduction ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������27

University of Thessaly 3.2 Drought Concepts ..............................................................................29
and Drought Definitions and Types • Drought Quantification and
Agricultural University
Monitoring • Drought Features and Characteristics
of Athens
3.3 Meteorological Drought and Indices ............................................... 33
Zoltan Dunkel Meteorological Drought • Classification of Meteorological Drought
Hungarian Meteorological Indices • Description of Selected Meteorological Drought Indices
Society 3.4 Discussions ..........................................................................................39
Saeid Eslamian 3.5 Summary and Conclusions ...............................................................40
Isfahan University Authors ............................................................................................................40
of Technology References ........................................................................................................ 41

Abstract Drought is part of nature’s climate variability recurring diachronically at a regional

scale. Drought is considered as one of the major natural hazards having significant impact on
several sectors of the economy, society, and environment. Drought is basically caused by the lack
of precipitation events in a region over a period of time and can be regarded as an extreme climatic
event. The early stages of accumulated precipitation deficiencies are referred to as meteorologi-
cal drought being a region-specific natural event, since the atmospheric conditions that result in
deficiencies of precipitation are highly variable from region to region. This chapter covers meteo-
rological drought and its quantification through several drought indices. An attempt is under-
taken to understand meteorological drought and explore several features through drought indices.
There are many drought indicators and indices being used around the world. Indeed, the most
commonly used drought indices are presented. Moreover, monitoring and assessment of meteo-
rological droughts is also considered, along with significant drought impacts. The Standardized
Precipitation Index is recommended by the World Meteorological Organization to be used uni-
versally, but it may not be accepted as the only and absolute index. Based on specific regional and
climatic conditions, the use of other indices should also be taken into consideration.

3.1 
Introduction
Drought is part of nature’s climate variability. Indeed, drought is considered as a natural regional
phenomenon with a temporal periodicity. Essentially, droughts originate from a deficiency or lack of
precipitation in a region over an extended period of time. This is why droughts are also referred to as
“nonevents” and can be considered as extreme climatic events associated with water resources deficit.
Moreover, drought is considered as one of the major natural hazards having significant impact on sev-
eral sectors of the economy, society, and environment [35,37]. There are several unique characteristics,

27
28 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

which differentiate droughts from other environmental hazards, namely, its slow onset often charac-
terized as a creeping phenomenon; its nonstructural impacts, which can be regional or local lasting
for a long time or a very short time; and the absence of a universal definition leading to inaction [52].
Moreover, the impacts of droughts may be severe and are neither immediate nor easily measured. All
these may accumulate difficulties in drought assessment and response, which consequently may result
in slow progress on drought preparedness plans and mitigation actions.
There is a need to establish the context in which the drought phenomenon and its associated impacts
are being described leading to a better definition. More than 150 published definitions of drought have
been identified [46]. If drought is considered as a phenomenon, it is certainly an atmospheric phenome-
non. However, when considering drought as a hazard, there is a tendency to define and classify droughts
into different types. Definitions of drought help in identifying the duration and severity of drought and
are useful in recognizing and planning for it. Four operational definitions are commonly used, namely,
meteorological or climatological, agricultural or agrometeorological, hydrological, and socioeconomic
drought [24]. With the exception of meteorological drought, the other types of drought, such as agricul-
tural and hydrological, emphasize on the human or social aspects of drought in terms of the interaction
between the natural characteristics of meteorological drought and human activities that depend on
precipitation. As their names imply, these diverse drought types impact different sectors, but in most
instances, the impacts related to each sector overlap both temporally and spatially.
As already mentioned, all droughts begin with a deficiency of precipitation in a region over a period of
time. These early stages of accumulated departure of precipitation from normal or expected are usually
considered as meteorological drought [36]. A continuation of these dry conditions over a longer period of
time, sometimes in association with above-normal temperatures, high winds, and low relative humidity,
quickly results in impacts on agricultural and hydrological sectors (Figure 3.1). Meteorological droughts
are characterized by a change in the local meteorological conditions, such as the prevalence of a high-
pressure ridge. The geomorphological and climatological characteristics of a region play an important
role in meteorological drought, since they may imply different ­precipitation regimes. Meteorological
droughts can develop quickly, but they can also end just as quickly, if the precipitation deficits are

Natural climate variability

Precipitation deficiency High temp., high winds, low

Meteorological

(amount, intensity, timing) relative humidity, greater

drought

sunshine, less cloud cover

Reduced infiltration, runoff,
deep percolation, and Increased evaporation
groundwater recharge and transpiration
Time (duration)

Soil water deficiency

Hydrological Agricultural
drought

Plant water stress, reduced

biomass and yield

Reduced streamflow, inflow to

drought

reservoirs, lakes, and ponds;

reduced wetlands,
wildlife habitat

Economic impacts Social impacts Environmental impacts

FIGURE 3.1 Drought types and temporal sequential procedure. (From Dalezios, N.R. et al., Nat. Hazards Earth
Syst. Sci., 14, 2435, 2014.)
Meteorological Drought Indices 29

relatively small. However, these types of drought may also develop into a multiseasonal event leading to
one of the other types of drought.
This chapter covers the subject of meteorological drought indices. A comprehensive presentation
of drought concepts, definitions, and types is attempted. This is followed by a description of meteo-
rological drought, along with its features and characteristics. Then, quantification of meteorological
drought is presented through the use of indices. Drought monitoring and assessment is also consid-
ered. Moreover, the improvement of drought prediction and early warning methods, as well as dis-
semination of warnings, requires a continuous effort. Indeed, the impacts of drought are often slow to
appear. A description of indicative meteorological drought indices is presented. The adoption of the
Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI) and recommendation to be applied universally and the need for
the development of a global drought risk model are also discussed.

3.2 
Drought Concepts
Drought differs from other environmental hazards in several ways. Among the extreme meteorologi-
cal events, drought is possibly the most slowly developing and long-lasting event and probably the least
predictable among atmospheric hazards. As already mentioned, drought is a slow-onset environmental
hazard, also known as a creeping phenomenon. The driving factor is the cumulative precipitation defi-
ciency, which may happen quickly or may take months before the impacts become apparent. Similarly,
due to its creeping nature, drought effects are also slow to appear, lagging precipitation deficits by weeks
or months. Moreover, the assessment of the onset and the end of a drought period is a complicated task.
It is recognized that because of these mainly temporal characteristics, drought cannot be compared
with other environmental hazards, such as flood, hailstorm, or frost, which can also contribute signifi-
cantly to a regional annual loss due to unfavorable natural circumstances. Due to its peculiar charac-
ter, drought deserves the greatest scientific and operational investigation. The current trend consists of
analyzing several well-accepted and widely used drought indices and assessing and comparing their
theoretical and practical advantages, limitations, interrelations, potential joint implementation, and
numerical effectiveness.

3.2.1 
Drought Definitions and Types
Drought constitutes a compound concept. As a first guess, it seems that drought may be addressed and
considered in a homogeneous way. However, after a detailed and thorough consideration, it has become
evident that there is no precise and universally accepted definition of drought [16]. Indeed, there are hun-
dreds of definitions, which simply contribute to the confusion about the existence of a drought and its
degree of severity [45]. Needless to say, definitions of drought should be region and application or impact
specific. In fact, droughts are regional in extent and each region maintains specific climatic characteris-
tics. As an example, the amount, seasonality, and form of precipitation may differ significantly between
regions. Moreover, besides precipitation consideration, temperature, wind, and relative humidity may
also be important factors to identify the regional character of drought. In addition, definitions also need
to be application specific, since drought impacts vary between sectors. Even within sectors, there are
many different assessments and considerations of drought, because impacts may differ significantly.
Starting with the International Meteorological Vocabulary [50], which is one of the most authentic
sources, two very simple definitions of drought are provided: (1) prolonged absence or marked defi-
ciency of precipitation and (2) period of abnormally dry weather sufficiently prolonged for the lack of
precipitation to cause a serious hydrological imbalance. From the same source, the definition of “dry
season” is included: period of the year characterized by the (almost) complete absence of rainfall, where
the term is mainly used for low latitude regions. Moreover, the definition of “dry spell” is also presented:
period of abnormally dry weather, where the use of this term should be confined to conditions less
severe than those of a drought. From the definitions mentioned earlier, it is evident that dealing with
30 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

drought is not a simple task and a drought may be identified from a number of different points of view.
Indeed, drought has different meanings to various groups of the society, depending on either their spe-
cific interest or their historical and economic perspective. Therefore, it is difficult to find a completely
adequate definition of drought, which could be acceptable throughout the world.
For a better understanding, drought is classified into several types; however, the relationship between
the different types of drought is complex. Specifically, the American Meteorological Society groups
drought definitions and types into four categories, which have already been mentioned before, namely,
meteorological or climatological, agricultural, hydrological, and socioeconomic drought [24]. Two more
drought types are added, namely, atmospheric and physiological drought. Keeping in mind that the
subject of this chapter is meteorological drought, a brief description of the drought types mentioned
earlier follows.
Atmospheric drought occurs if too high a saturation deficit has been measured for a durable time. This
drought type more or less refers to the dry spell category. It can be stated that, in general, droughts are
shown to be associated with the persistence of ridges or centers of high-pressure systems at the middle
level in the atmosphere. Moreover, the corresponding reduced cloud cover results in positive tempera-
ture anomalies in the lower atmosphere, which produces the middle-level pressure anomaly and favors
subsidence in the high level, keeping the atmosphere significantly drier and more stable than normal
[7,34]. Studies in several areas around the world have shown that drought periods are often character-
ized by a substantial decrease in the amount of rainfall per day, by an increase in the continentality of
the clouds, and by a lack of rain-producing clouds.
Meteorological drought means a longer period of time with considerably less than average precipita-
tion amounts, which corresponds to the general definition of drought.
Agricultural drought receives two explanations: the first one is that the available soil moisture is inad-
equate and the second one is that yield is considerably less than the average because of water shortage.
Agricultural drought occurs when plant water availability—from precipitation and water stored in the
soil—falls below that required by a plant community during a critical growth stage. This leads to below-
average yields in both pastoral and grain-producing regions.
Hydrological drought is generally defined as a period of below normal conditions for one or a com-
bination of factors, such as streamflow, reservoir storage, and groundwater. Hydrological drought nor-
mally occurs on a rather large area, such as a watershed.
Physiological drought can occur when the plant is unable to take up water in spite of sufficiently avail-
able soil moisture. This situation refers to the circumstances when plant shows drought symptoms, but
there is no drought assessment based on the prevailing atmospheric conditions. This situation could be
caused by abnormally cold weather or in the case when the plant is infected.
Socioeconomic drought is defined in terms of loss from an average or expected return. It can be mea-
sured by both social and economic indicators, of which profit is only one [27]. Socioeconomic drought
can be considered as the integration of several drought categories. It may imply any disadvantageous
impact of consecutively repeating dry spells. It may also mean the lack of some economic goods due to
meteorological, hydrological, and/or agricultural drought. Under specific conditions, its definition can
be close to the definition of famine.

3.2.2 Drought Quantification and Monitoring

Drought quantification and assessment can be implemented through the use of indicators and/or
indices. Drought indicators are measures of climate variables, which describe features of drought, and
provide an indication of potential drought-related stress or deficiency. Data analysis, interpretation,
and aggregation lead to drought indicators, where several of them can be synthesized into the develop-
ment of a drought index. Indeed, an index is a method of deriving “value-added” information related to
drought and constitutes an attempt to quantify a drought and its magnitude. It is also important to note
Meteorological Drought Indices 31

that indices are indicators as well. Clarifications are always required about the scientific and operational
validity of an index, that is, how each indicator is combined and weighted in the index and how an index
value is related to geophysical and statistical characteristics of drought [38].
Drought indices can be easily implemented and are extensively used in drought quantification, assess-
ment, and monitoring. There are several review studies on the use of drought indices [3,10–13,17,22,28,31]
based on both conventional and satellite data [8,9,27]. It should be noted that the progression of drought
indices development emphasizes on the derivation of a number or value that can constitute an expres-
sion of drought severity. As other drought indices have also been developed, it has been assessed that
not all indices can be applied in all locations, since many have been developed to address a particular
problem in a certain climatic zone. In evaluating and selecting various drought indices, it is best to look
at the various applications in which they are likely to be used. Many drought indices have the potential
to be used in multiple applications or can be applied to various sectors.
In judging the overall utility of drought indices, a set of weighted decision criteria and assigned values
is constructed into each index. These criteria are based on desirable properties that an index should ide-
ally possess, namely, robustness, tractability, transparency, sophistication, expandability, and dimen-
sionality. The list of criteria may be expanded or condensed, but the criteria mentioned earlier provide a
reasonable framework for the evaluation of drought indices without excessive complication. The criteria
weights, which basically reflect the relative importance of the evaluation criteria, are difficult to be pre-
cisely justified, as their determination is ultimately affected by professional experience and personal
judgment [24]. Nevertheless, the weights can be adjusted to comply with local or regional climatic or
geographic conditions.
Drought monitoring is an equally important issue. Given the complexity of drought phenomenon,
it is necessary to know how droughts develop and what indicators are available to quantify drought
identification and monitoring. Gathering information about the primary weather and climate charac-
teristics of a region is an important first step needed to understand both the climate and drought cli-
matology of the region in order to monitor droughts. Drought early warning systems (DEWS) focalize
on monitoring drought conditions and constitute an important part for adequate drought preparation
[47,48,51]. Nevertheless, DEWS for the monitoring of drought evolution and development is of critical
importance in economically and environmentally sensitive regions and prove to offer very significant
inputs in any drought preparedness and mitigation plan [7]. Needless to say, without adequate plan-
ning and preparedness, drought impacts may lead to even more severe consequences for many sectors.
Indeed, drought forecasting and prediction, or the use of DEWS, can be considered in several ways.
Indeed, prediction of the drought index value into the future could be based on either weather fore-
casting or climate prediction through global circulation models. Alternatively, time series analysis of
drought index values could be used for drought forecasting, such as autoregressive integrated moving
average (ARIMA) models, although this is a black-box modeling approach.
With the basic characteristics of drought involving a lack or deficit of precipitation, it is critical to
have reliable and long-term records of precipitation. Traditional methods of drought assessment and
monitoring rely on rainfall data, which are usually limited in a region, often inaccurate and, most
importantly, difficult to obtain in near real time [40]. If the precipitation distribution for a region is
typically seasonal, then a shortage of precipitation during this time is not necessarily an indication
of the beginning of a drought. Thus, it is important to determine the “crucial” period(s) of precipita-
tion for any region. Even though precipitation is the basis of many drought indicators, many other
indicators are also significant in the assessment and monitoring of drought severity. What is usually
problematic is that some indicators may not have a sufficient record length, and this is usually the case
with remotely sensed data. Nevertheless, it is recognized that remote sensing has gradually become
an important tool for the detection of the spatial and temporal distribution and characteristics of
drought at different scales. In summary, it is best to consider multiple indicators to verify the exis-
tence and severity of drought.
32 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

3.2.3 
Drought Features and Characteristics
In order to assess and monitor drought hazards and to alleviate their impact, it is necessary to detect
several drought features, such as severity, duration, periodicity, areal extent, onset, and end time.
Indeed, conventional and/or remote sensing data and methods can be used to delineate the spatial and
temporal variability of several drought features in quantitative terms [8,9,24]. A brief description of
some key features follows.
Severity or intensity of drought refers to the degree of the precipitation shortfall and/or the
severity of impact associated with the shortfall. The severity of drought is defined as escalation of
the phenomenon into classes, such as mild, moderate, severe, and extreme. The severity is usually
determined through drought indicators and indices, which include the classes mentioned earlier.
Indeed, the severity is measured by the departure of some climatic parameter, such as precipita-
tion; indicator, such as reservoir level; or index, such as Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI),
from normal and is closely linked to duration in the determination of impact. The regions affected
by severe drought evolve gradually, and there is a seasonal and annual shift of the so-called epi-
center, which is the area of maximum severity. There is not a single unifying technique to quan-
tify drought severity. Even within an individual category, the supremacy of a specific index is not
immediately clear.
Periodicity is considered the recurrence interval of drought. Indeed, the frequency of an extreme
event, such as drought, is usually expressed by its return period or recurrence interval, which may be
defined as the average interval of time within which the magnitude of the event is reached or exceeded
once. The magnitude of an extreme event is given by the total depth occurring in a particular duration,
and data for extreme events, such as droughts, can be usually presented by severity–duration–frequency
curves for several sites throughout a region [6].
Duration of a drought episode is defined as the time interval from the start to the end time
expressed usually in months. Droughts usually require a minimum of 2–3 months to become estab-
lished and can continue for months or years. Since drought is a complex phenomenon, the assessment
of start and end time is a complicated technical subject. Moreover, the magnitude of drought impacts
is closely related to the timing of the onset of precipitation deficiency, its severity, and the duration
of the event.
Onset or the beginning of a drought is determined by the occurrence of a drought episode. The
beginning of a drought is assessed through indicators or indices reaching certain threshold value.
On the other hand, end time of a drought episode signifies the termination of drought based again on
threshold values of indicators or indices. It is usually difficult to determine the onset and the end time
of a drought and on what criteria these determinations should be made. Moreover, it should be consid-
ered whether an end to drought is signaled by a return to normal precipitation and what is the required
time period of normal precipitation to be sustained for the drought to be terminated. Similarly, one
should also consider whether reservoirs and groundwater levels are required to return to average or
normal conditions.
Areal extent of drought is considered the spatial coverage of the phenomenon, as is quantified in
severity classes by indicators or indices. Remote sensing has contributed significantly in the delinea-
tion of this parameter by counting the number of pixels in each class. It is recognized that droughts
also differ by their spatial characteristics. It should be mentioned that the areal extent of severe
droughts evolves gradually and varies with time, shifting from season to season and from year to
year. Moreover, the climatic diversity and size of large regions, such as the United States, justify the
occurrence of drought every year; however, it is not expected to affect the entire region. Nevertheless,
the spatial characteristics of drought may have serious implications for several sectors of the econ-
omy, such as agriculture, energy, transportation, health, recreation and tourism, and affect land use
planning.
Meteorological Drought Indices 33

3.3 Meteorological Drought and Indices

It is well known that a drought index is one type of climate index and ocean index is another.
Nevertheless, this chapter covers the subject of meteorological drought indices. As already mentioned,
meteorological drought must be considered as a region-specific natural event, since the atmospheric
conditions, which prevail and develop through multiple causes resulting in precipitation deficiencies,
are highly variable from region to region. Moreover, drought indices constitute an attempt to quantify
and assess the severity of drought over a region by assimilating data on rainfall and other parameters,
such as soil moisture, vegetation, snowpack, streamflow, or other environmental indicators into a com-
prehensive numerical value.
This section presents a brief review of meteorological drought and drought indices, as well as a list of
available meteorological drought indices, along with a description of a few indicative and widely used indi-
ces, namely, rainfall deciles, PDSI, SPI, and Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI).

3.3.1 Meteorological Drought
Meteorological drought is usually defined as the degree of dryness specified by precipitation deficiency
as compared to some “normal” or average amount and by the duration of the dry period [44]. For the
identification of meteorological drought, a threshold of precipitation deficiency over some predeter-
mined period of time is usually considered. The selected thresholds of deficiency and the corresponding
duration, for example, 80% of normal and 6 months, respectively, are expected to vary locally according
to the existing climatic conditions. Nevertheless, the beginning of any other type of drought, such as
agricultural or hydrological drought, starts with the onset of meteorological drought, which then pre-
vails long enough to impact the agricultural and/or the hydrological sectors.
As expected, there are different characteristics of meteorological drought for different regional cli-
matic zones. Specifically, for regions characterized by year-round precipitation regimes, such as tropical
or humid subtropical climates, meteorological drought may consider and identify periods of drought
based on the number of days with precipitation lower than some specified threshold. On the other hand,
for regions characterized by seasonal rainfall patterns, the consideration mentioned earlier seems unre-
alistic. Moreover, for monsoon regions, for example, actual precipitation deviations from normal may
be related to average amounts on a monthly, seasonal, or annual basis.

3.3.2 Classification of Meteorological Drought Indices

Meteorological drought indices can be used in the context of DEWS in order to provide timely informa-
tion on drought for decision-making [13]. It should be stated that a meteorological drought index value
is essentially considered far more useful than raw data, especially in the case of drought monitoring for
near-real-time decision-making [36]. Moreover, several other uses of a meteorological drought index
involve the assessment of thresholds for a number of drought features, such as onset, severity, magni-
tude, duration, and end time. Furthermore, a meteorological drought index can also be used as ground-
truthing information for modeling efforts or remotely sensed detection of several drought features.
A classification and grouping of drought indices is considered based on recently conducted studies
and using similarity characteristics [12], namely, atmospheric drought indices, indices of precipitation
anomaly, aridity indices, soil moisture indices, combined or recursive indices, and indices based on
remotely sensed information. Although this classification refers to indices from all types of drought, the
current presentation is restricted to meteorological drought indices.
Table 3.1 presents an indicative list of available and commonly used meteorological drought indices
in different classes with the corresponding reference. A brief description of the classes of meteorological
drought indices follows.
34 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

TABLE 3.1 Indicative List of Classes and Indices of Meteorological Drought

Classification of Drought Indices References

1. Atmospheric drought indices [50]

1.1 Saturation deficit [33]
2. Precipitation anomaly indices [49]
2.1 Precipitation index
2.2 Relative precipitation sum
2.3 Relative anomaly
2.4 Standardized anomaly index (SAI)
2.5 Average standard anomaly
3. Aridity indices [5]
3.1 Lang’s rainfall index
3.2 De Martone aridity index
3.3 Ped’s drought index (PDI1) [30]
3.4 Selyaninov’s hydrothermal coefficient [33]
3.5 Thornthwaite index [41]
3.6 Potential water deficit
3.7 Potential evaporation ratio
3.8 Aridity index: moisture available index
3.9 Relative evaporation
3.10 Surface energy balance
3.11 Bowen ratio [37]
4. Recursive indices
4.1 Fooley anomaly index (FAI) [14]
4.2 Bhalme–Mooley drought index (BMDI) [2]
4.3 Palmer drought severity index (PDSI) family [29]
4.4 Standardized precipitation index [26]
4.5 Surface water supply index (SWSI)
4.6 Reclamation drought index (RDI)
4.7 Palmer drought index (PDI)
4.8 Palmer crop moisture index (CMI)
4.9 Keetch–Byram drought index (KBDI)
4.10 Effective drought index
4.11 Reconnaissance drought index (RDI) [43]
5. Remotely sensed information [45]
5.1 Crop water stress index (CWSI) [19,20]
5.2 Vegetation index
5.3 Normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) [43]
5.4 Stress degree days [18,31]

3.3.2.1 Indices of Atmospheric Drought

The standard signal for a dry spell is low humidity. The water vapor saturation deficit is commonly used for
the characterization of atmospheric drought, although the temporal scale for this type of analysis is usually
much shorter than a month, sometimes only a few days, but the consequence of these days could be cata-
strophic in the case of certain species. These indices are not commonly accepted indices [33], but sometimes
it is worth introducing them mainly in effective water use for irrigation. The corresponding meteorological
drought index takes the simple form of a typical meteorological element, namely, the saturation deficit [50].
Meteorological Drought Indices 35

3.3.2.2 Indices of Precipitation Anomaly

Any forms of drought indices are related to some antecedent precipitation amounts. This past period
of time could last from 3 or 4 weeks to years. Nevertheless, it is understood that drought usually occurs
after an abnormal rainy season or period. Therefore, the simplest drought index is the deviation from
a normal or average precipitation value. There are certainly some combinations, or normalization, or
generalization of deviation for possibly better performance. Indeed, there have to be long-term com-
parisons between drought index and yield data before the establishment of any threshold value. There
are several existing precipitation anomaly indices (Table 3.1).

3.3.2.3 A ridity Indices

Aridity is a characteristic of climate, which is related to precipitation inadequacy to maintain vegeta-
tion. The theoretical base for the aridity index is the evapotranspiration/precipitation ratio [5]. The sim-
plest approach is to use empirical models to estimate evapotranspiration based only on temperature or
degree-days, since the difference in the aridity indices is in the approximation of the evapotranspira-
tion. There are several types of aridity indices (Table 3.1).

3.3.2.4 Recursive Drought Indices

These indices attempt to describe and express the cumulative effect of prolonged moisture deficits
on a monthly basis. These indices have proven to be of high utility in the delineation of meteorologi-
cally determined droughts or dry spell, which possess a kind of memory, where actual values depend
on previous values of the corresponding meteorological variables. These indices are called recursive
indices due to their method of computation. There are several recursive indices including the family
of PDSI (Table 3.1).

3.3.2.5 Indices Based on Remotely Sensed Parameters

Most of the existing and widely used remotely sensed drought indices are based on spectral reflectance
of vegetation and, thus, are mainly used as indices of agricultural drought, known as vegetation indices.
Nevertheless, agricultural drought indices are outside the scope of this chapter. It is worth mentioning
that in recent years, there has been significant progress and development in the field of remote sens-
ing due to scientific and technological advances with increasing reliability on data and methods. As
a general rule, it can be stated that any meteorological drought index can be converted to a remotely
sensed index provided that precipitation and/or temperature are used in the index and are computed
by remotely sensed algorithms or methods. Moreover, the utility of remotely sensed drought indices
is expected to increase drastically in the forthcoming years due to the availability of precipitation and
temperature data platforms at a global scale.

3.3.3 Description of Selected Meteorological Drought Indices

From Table 3.1, and for illustrative purposes, a few commonly and widely used meteorological drought
indices are presented, namely, rainfall deciles, PDSI, SPI, and SPEI.

3.3.3.1 Rainfall Deciles
A rainfall decile–based system for monitoring meteorological drought has been suggested [15], where
monthly precipitation totals from a long-term record are first ranked from highest to lowest to con-
struct a cumulative frequency distribution. The median is used instead of the mean to assess the central
tendency of the record. Climatological observations above and below this marker may be divided into
10 quantiles, or deciles. The distribution is then split into 10 parts (tenths of distribution or deciles).
The first decile is the precipitation value not exceeded by the lowest 10% of all precipitation values in a
record; the second is between the lowest 10% and 20% and the fifth decile would be the median.
36 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

TABLE 3.2 The Rainfall Deciles Classification Table

Decile Level Moisture Level

Deciles 1–2: Lowest 20% of data Much below normal

Deciles 3–4: Next lowest 20% of data Below normal
Deciles 5–6: Middle 20% of data Near normal
Deciles 7–8: Next highest 20% of data Above normal
Deciles 9–10: Highest 20% of data Much above normal
Source: Gibbs, W.J. and Maher, J.V., Rainfall deciles as
drought indicators, Bulletin No. 48, Bureau of Meteorology,
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, 1967.

Any precipitation value (e.g., from the current or past month) can be compared with and interpreted in
terms of these deciles. A reasonably long precipitation record (30–50 years) is required for this approach.
Decile indices (DIs) are grouped into five classes, two deciles per class, which are shown in Table 3.2.
DI is relatively simple to calculate and requires only precipitation data and fewer assumptions than more
comprehensive indices, such as PDSI. However, this simplicity can lead to conceptual difficulties. For
example, it is reasonable for a drought to terminate when observed rainfall is close to or above normal
conditions. But minor amounts of precipitation during periods in which little or no precipitation is rou-
tine, such as dry summer months, can activate the first stopping rule, even though the absolute quantity
of precipitation is trivial and does not terminate the water deficit. Therefore, climates with highly sea-
sonal precipitation may not be well suited to rainfall deciles when relying upon the two stopping criteria.
A supplemental, third rule, which is used by the Drought Watch Service of the Australian Bureau of
Meteorology, considers total precipitation, since the beginning of a drought. If this total exceeds the first
decile for all such months, then the meteorological drought may be considered to have ended [24].
This method is simple but needs a long-term period of record to have the most utility. The straight-
forward nature automatically determines the status of the dryness for a location or region, allowing
researchers to know exactly where the current precipitation regime compares historically. For the
implementation of this method, certain deciles must be used as thresholds, which trigger some type
of response. Having the rainfall deciles method as part of a DEWS establishes when a drought begins
and ends, according to the data and characteristics of drought in the region, by defining the thresholds
being used. With the flexibility of establishing thresholds based on the climate of the region, the deciles
method can be used to monitor all types of drought, as it has been applied to monitor both agricultural
and hydrological droughts.

3.3.3.2 SPI
The SPI [26] quantifies the precipitation deficit for multiple time scales, such as for 3-, 6-, 9-, and
12-month periods, relative to the same months historically [25,38]. Ideally, at least 20–30 years of
serially complete monthly values are needed with 50–60 years (or more) being more optimal and
preferred [16]. The historical rainfall data of the station are fitted to a gamma distribution. This is con-
ducted through a process of maximum likelihood estimation of the gamma distribution parameters,
β and γ (Equation 3.1):

x g -1 exp ( - x / b )
P (x) g >0 (3.1)
bg G ( g )

where
P(x) is the probability density frequency (p.d.f.) equation
x is the variable
Meteorological Drought Indices 37

TABLE 3.3 Standardized Precipitation Index Classification Scale

Standardized Precipitation Index Value Moisture Level
+2.0 and greater Extremely wet
+1.5 to 1.99 Very wet
+1.0 to 1.49 Moderately wet
−0.99 to 0.99 Near normal
−1.0 to −1.49 Moderately dry
−1.5 to −1.99 Severely dry
−2.0 and less Extremely dry
Source: Guttman, N.B., J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., 35(2), 311, 1999.

McKee [26] used a classification system to define drought severities (intensities) resulting from the
SPI (Table 3.3). The SPI is computed by dividing the difference between the normalized seasonal precipi-
tation and its long-term seasonal mean by the standard deviation (Equation 3.2). Thus,

Xij - Xim
SPI = (3.2)
s

where
Xij is the seasonal precipitation at the ith rain gauge station and jth observation
Xim is the long-term seasonal mean
σ is its standard deviation

A drought event occurs anytime the SPI is continuously negative and reaches an intensity of −1.0 or
less. The event ends when the SPI becomes positive. This is where the SPI has a great amount of utility.
Each drought event, therefore, has a duration defined by its beginning and end and intensity for each
month that the event continues. The positive sum of the SPI for all the months within a drought event
can be termed the drought’s “magnitude.” Similar to the PDSI, SPI may be used for monitoring both dry
and wet conditions. Another reason for the SPI’s appeal is that the index can be calculated with missing
data. Nevertheless, the SPI is flexible and can be calculated for both short- and long-term periods by
selecting different time steps. Initially, the SPI has been calculated for periods from 1 to 72 months, but
it is mostly used for periods of 24 months or less. This flexibility has allowed the SPI to be very useful in
monitoring not only meteorological but also agricultural and hydrological droughts, where time scales
and impacts are variable. Seven classes of SPI are shown in Table 3.3.

3.3.3.3 SPEI
Drought indices that also account for temperatures can help put into proper perspective how tempera-
tures are impacting the water balance of a region. Typical examples of such indices are, respectively, the
SPEI [43], which uses the difference between precipitation and potential evapotranspiration (PET), and
an equivalent index, namely, the Reconnaissance Drought Index [8,9,42], which is based on the ratio
between precipitation and PET.
The SPEI is essentially based on the SPI and adds a temperature component for the computation of
a simplified water balance. The SPEI, like the PDSI, uses a simple water balance computation, which
is based on the model for calculating PET [40]. Alternatively, the Blaney–Criddle [4] method could be
used for PET, which is valid mainly for dry and warm summers. Several studies have shown that good
estimates of PET can be obtained using several meteorological parameters, but for drought indices this
is not a requirement, since only a general estimation of the water balance is required. This also keeps the
calculations simple and usable, given the additional data requirements for determining actual evapo-
transpiration values. Having the same flexibility that the SPI has in being able to be updated weekly
38 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

using a moving window for each time step, the SPEI uses the difference between the basic calculations
for PET and precipitation to determine a wet or dry period. Given the flexible nature of the SPEI, it has
the capacity to be utilized in monitoring the different types of droughts, since the methodology includes
water balance calculations. As such, it has the potential to better track agricultural drought.

3.3.3.4 PDSI
One of the most widely used indices, especially in the United States, has been the PDSI [29]. The PDSI
is considered an attempt to put the full water balance into a regional perspective, with the additional
potential to identify meteorological and agricultural drought episodes [6,21]. Although PDSI is referred
to as an index of meteorological drought, however, the procedure considers precipitation and soil mois-
ture conditions, which are determinants of agricultural and hydrological drought, as it measures the
availability of moisture in the region being monitored using a water balance equation. The PDSI incor-
porates antecedent precipitation, temperature, and soil moisture supply and demand based on evapo-
transpiration estimation [32,40], as well as a previous PDSI value. In addition, the PDSI is standardized
for different regions and time periods to facilitate direct comparisons of the PDSI between different
regions. Like the SPI, the PDSI has both a wet and dry categorization scheme, with most values falling
into the range of +4 to −4 (Table 3.4). A brief conceptual description of the five steps for the computation
of PDSI follows [17].
Step 1: Hydrological accounting. PDSI uses a two-layered model for soil moisture computations with
certain assumptions concerning field capacity and transfer of moisture to and from the layers.
A monthly hydrologic accounting is carried out for a long series of years using five parameters:
precipitation, evapotranspiration, soil moisture loss and recharge, and runoff.
Step 2: Climatic coefficients. The results of step 1 are summarized to compute four monthly coef-
ficients, namely, evapotranspiration, recharge, runoff, and loss, which are dependent on the ana-
lyzed local climate.
Step 3: CAFEC values. The series are reanalyzed using the derived coefficients to determine the
amount of moisture required for “normal” weather during each month. These normal, or cli-
matically appropriate for existing conditions (CAFEC), quantities are computed for each of the
parameters listed in step 1, in order to assess the dimensionless index across space and time.
Step 4: Moisture anomaly index. The precipitation departure (precipitation minus CAFEC precipita-
tion) for each month is computed and denoted as D and then converts the departures to indices
of moisture anomaly (Equation 3.3). This moisture anomaly index has come to be known as the
Palmer Z index and reflects the departure of the weather of a particular month from the average

TABLE 3.4 The Palmer Drought Severity Index Classification Scale

4.0 or more Extremely wet
3.0 to 3.99 Very wet
2.0 to 2.99 Moderately wet
1.0 to 1.99 Slightly wet
0.5 to 0.99 Incipient wet spell
0.49 to −0.49 Near normal
−0.5 to −0.99 Incipient dry spell
−1.0 to −1.99 Mild drought
−2.0 to −2.99 Moderate drought
−3.0 to −3.99 Severe drought
−4.0 or less Extreme drought
Source: Mirabbasi, R. et al., J. Hydrol., 492, 35, 2013.
Meteorological Drought Indices 39

moisture climate for that month, regardless of what has occurred in prior or subsequent months.
The equation of Z index is
Z = Kj ×D (3.3)

where
Kj is the weight coefficient of month j
D is the precipitation departure

Step 5: Drought severity. In this final step, the Z-index series is analyzed to determine the begin-
ning, ending, and severity of the drought periods. The methodology involves computing, for each
month, three intermediate indices (X 1, X 2, and X 3), and a probability factor. These intermediate
indices are computed by
Zj
X j = 0.897 × X j -1 + (3.4)
3
where
Zj represents accumulated values of the moisture anomaly index for the driest intervals
Xj is the value of PDSI for the jth month

Palmer’s procedure has been initially characterized as a very satisfactory solution by jointly using
precipitation and temperature as predictor variables [1,21]. The PDSI has become widely used in the
United States, as well as internationally, and has been applied in countless research studies, as well as
on an operational basis [23,49]. Despite several assumptions made in the water balance calculations, its
other limitations and deficiencies, and the empirical nature of some of the standardized coefficients, the
PDSI can be a useful tool for both research and operational drought assessment, if used appropriately
and its limitations stated earlier acknowledged [1,6,23].

3.4 
Discussions
As already mentioned, all droughts begin with a deficiency of precipitation in a region over a period of
time. These early stages of accumulated departure of precipitation from normal or expected are usually
considered as meteorological drought. Indeed, meteorological drought is characterized as a regional
natural event, due to the regional, and highly variable, character of the prevailing atmospheric condi-
tions, which originate from multiple causes and result in precipitation deficiencies. A continuation of
these dry conditions over a longer period of time, sometimes in association with above-normal tempera-
tures, high winds, and low relative humidity, quickly results in impacts on agricultural and hydrological
sectors (Figure 3.1).
As work toward developing drought indices continues, knowing which indices work best for a region
and how to apply them, it becomes critical in establishing a functional DEWS, which focalize on moni-
toring drought conditions through the use of drought indicators and indices [13]. The United States
Drought Monitor (USDM) system uses a composite of multiple indicators covering various short- and
long-term time frames, to develop a ranking methodology for drought analysis leading to a single
product [39]. The USDM system has also the flexibility to integrate new tools and data and additional
information, if available, in order to enhance the level of accuracy [48]. Depending on the data avail-
ability and quality for any particular area, it may be possible to utilize many drought indices that are
available and determine the most suitable for any particular area or season for drought monitoring and
DEWS. Using an approach that considers all the available indicators would also allow for the flexibility
to implement more temperature-based indicators for drought monitoring and early warning systems.
Similarly, the Drought Management Center for South East Europe, located in Ljubljana, Slovenia, con-
ducts drought monitoring based on SPI and issues regular bulletins for the whole region [3].
40 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

With some indices requiring large volumes of data and, thus, becoming more complex, the World
Meteorological Organization (WMO) wanted to put forward a recommendation for a single meteoro-
logical drought index to be the minimum standard and starting point for every country to calculate
and assess drought in order to provide more comparability between regions. An international expert
workshop at the University of Nebraska (November 8–11, 2009) announced via the “Lincoln Declaration
on Drought Indices” that the SPI is adopted by WMO and recommended as the drought index to be
computed and used globally by National Meteorological and Hydrological Services as the common
meteorological drought index [51].
The SPI computation for any region and location is based on long-term precipitation records for a
desired period or window, ranging typically from 1 to 24 months. The SPI is flexible, since it is designed
to quantify the precipitation deficit for multiple time scales, which reflect the impact of drought on the
availability of the different water resources. Specifically, soil moisture conditions respond to precipita-
tion anomalies on a relatively short scale. Streamflow, reservoir storage, and groundwater reflect the
long-term precipitation anomalies. Indeed, a 1- or 2-month SPI can be applicable to meteorological
drought, from 1 to 6 months for agricultural drought, and from 6 up to 24 months or more for hydro-
logical drought analyses and applications. In fact, shorter time scale SPIs, that is, up to a 3-month SPI,
can provide DEWS and can contribute to the assessment of drought severity. Moreover, the SPI is con-
sidered as spatially consistent, which means that there is comparability between different locations in
different climates for any given SPI value.
Besides the previously described advantages for using SPI globally, there are also some drawbacks
that have to be considered. At first, the computation of SPI is based only on precipitation data. Moreover,
there is no soil water balance component. In addition, the SPI is not applicable to climate change analy-
sis due to lack of temperature as an input parameter, which leads to the inability even for empirical
calculation of evapotranspiration.

3.5 Summary and Conclusions

In this chapter, the subject of meteorological drought indices has been addressed. At first, a comprehen-
sive presentation of drought concepts, definitions, and types has been considered. Then, a description of
meteorological drought, along with its features and characteristics, has been presented, followed by the
quantification of meteorological drought through the use of indices. Drought monitoring and assessment
is also considered. A description of indicative and widely used meteorological drought indices is presented.
The adoption of the SPI by the WMO and its recommendation to be applied universally is also discussed.
There is an international need to continue working toward newer and potentially better drought
indices that can also account for a changing climate in which there may be a shift in both temperature
and precipitation regimes. However, drought impacts are not yet systematically recorded internationally
and there are data constraints, as well as lack of sufficient and suitable data, for modeling drought haz-
ard. Despite these current limitations and difficulties, the international interest continues for address-
ing drought risk and developing global drought risk models. At the present time, international efforts
to develop and implement standards for drought quantification and monitoring, as well as systemati-
cally account for drought losses and impacts, constitute an important starting step toward drought risk
assessment. Moreover, DEWS and disaster insurance measures are certainly critical elements of drought
risk management and risk reduction. All these eventually contribute to building credible drought risk
models at all scales, from local to global.

Authors
Nicolas R. Dalezios is professor of agrometeorology and remote sensing, University of Thessaly, Volos,
Greece, and Agricultural University of Athens, Greece (2011–today). He was professor and founding
director of the Laboratory of Agrometeorology, University of Thessaly, Greece (1991–2011). He received
Meteorological Drought Indices 41

his postgraduate degrees in meteorology (Athens, 1972) and hydrological engineering (University of
Delft, the Netherlands, 1974) and received his PhD in civil engineering (University of Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada, 1982). He has a long-standing record in research in agrometeorology, agrohydrology, remote
sensing, modeling, environmental hazards, risk assessment, and climate variability/change. He is the
author or coauthor of more than 280 refereed publications and technical reports, editor and reviewer in
International Scientific Journal, author of two books, editor or coeditor of 15 edited books and coauthor
of 25 book chapters, and author or coauthor of numerous research articles and projects on drought
analysis, monitoring, and assessment.
Zoltan Dunkel is a retired meteorologist with the Hungarian Meteorological Service (OMSZ;
1977–2013). After retirement, he worked as invited lecturer of Kaposvar University (Hungary). He
was president of the Hungarian Met Service (2005–2007 and 2011–2013) and scientific secretary of
European commission cooperation in science and technology (EC COST) Meteorology (1998–2001).
His research interests include agrometeorological modeling, use of remote sensing in agricultural
meteorology, and climate change impacts to agriculture. He has been involved in international orga-
nizations, such as WMO, European Geoscience Union (EGU), and cooperation in science and tech-
nology (COST). He has participated in several international research projects, including studies on
drought assessment with numerous refereed publications. He is honorary professor as well as editor
and reviewer in international scientific journals. He has organized several international scientific
events. He has been awarded with the Knight’s Cross of Hungarian honors and the For National
Defence 1st Class Medal.
Saeid Eslamian is a full professor of hydrology and water resources engineering in the Department of
Water Engineering at Isfahan University of Technology, Iran, where he has been since 1995. He received
his PhD from the University of New South Wales, Australia, under the supervision of Professor David
Pilgrim. His research focuses mainly on water resources planning and management and statistical and
environmental hydrology in a changing climate. Formerly, he was a visiting professor at Princeton
University, New Jersey, and the University of ETH Zurich, Switzerland. On the research side, he has
started a research partnership from 2014 with McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. He has
contributed to more than 500 publications in journals and books or as technical reports. He is the
founder and chief editor of both International Journal of Hydrology Science and Technology (Scopus,
Inderscience) and Journal of Flood Engineering. He has authored more than 100 book chapters and
books. Recently, Professor Eslamian has started the editorship of several handbooks published by Taylor
& Francis Group (CRC Press). A three-volume Handbook of Engineering Hydrology in 2014, Urban
Water Reuse Handbook in 2015, a three-volume Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity (2017), and
Underground Aqueducts Handbook (2017) are published ones.

References
1. Alley W. M. 1984. The palmer drought severity index: Limitations and assumptions, Journal of
Applied Meteorology, 23: 1100–1109.
2. Bhalme, H. N. and Mooley, D. A. 1980. Large-scale drought/floods monsoon circulation, Monthly
Weather Review, 108: 1197–1211.
3. Bihari, Z., Kovács, T., Lakatos, M., Móring, A., Nagy, A., Németh, Á., Szentimrey, T., and Vincze,
E. 2012. Droughts in Hungary, DMCSEE Procekt, summaries, Hungarian Meteorological Service
(HMS), pp. 37–41.
4. Blaney, H. F. and Criddle, W. D. 1950. Determining water requirements in irrigated areas from cli­
matological and irrigation data, USDA Soil Conservation Service, Technical Paper No. 96, USDA,
Washington, DC, 48pp.
5. Budyko, M. I. 1952. Climate change and national plan of environment modification of Arid USSR
Areas (in Russian), Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, Soviet Union.
42 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

6. Dalezios, N. R., Loukas, A., Vasiliades, L., and Liakopoulos, H. 2000. Severity-duration-
frequency analysis of droughts and wet periods in Greece, Hydrological Sciences Journal, 45(5):
751–770.
7. Dalezios, N. R., Bampzelis, D., and Domenikiotis, C. 2009. An integrated methodological proce-
dure for alternative drought mitigation in Greece, European Water, 27(28): 53–73.
8. Dalezios, N. R., Blanta, A., and Spyropoulos, N. V. 2012. Assessment of remotely sensed drought
features in vulnerable agriculture, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 12: 3139–3150.
9. Dalezios, N. R., Blanta, A., Spyropoulos, N. V., and Tarquis, A. M. 2014. Risk identification of
agricultural drought for sustainable agroecosystems, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences,
14: 2435–2448.
10. Dunkel, Z. 2009. Brief surveying and discussing of drought indices used agricultural meteorology,
Időjárás, 113: 23–37.
11. Eitzinger, J. et al. 2008. Agroclimatic indices and simulation models, in: Nejedlik, P. and Orlandini,
S., eds., Survey of Agrometeorological Practices and Applications in Europe Regarding Climate
Change Impacts, COST-ESF, European Commission (EC), Luxembourg City, Luxembourg,
pp. 15–92.
12. Farago, T., Kozma, E., and Nemes, C.S. 1989. Drought indices in meteorology, Időjárás, 93: 45–59.
13. Farrell, D., Trotman, A., and Cox, C. 2010. Drought early warning and risk reduction: A case study
of the Caribbean drought of 2009–2010, Global Assessment Report: GAR 2011 on Disaster Risk
Reduction, UNISDR, Geneva, Switzerland, 22pp.
14. Fensham, R. J. and Holman, J. E. 1999. Temporal and spatial patterns in drought related tree dieback
in Australian savanna, Journal of Applied Ecology, 36: 1035–1050.
15. Gibbs, W. J. and Maher, J. V. 1967. Rainfall deciles as drought indicators, Bulletin No. 48, Bureau
of Meteorology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
16. Guttman, N. B. 1999. Accepting the standardized precipitation index: A calculation algorithm,
Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 35(2): 311–322.
17. Heim, R.R. Jr. 2002. A review of twentieth-century drought indices used in the United States,
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 83(8): 1149–1165.
18. Idso, S. B., Jackson, R. D., Pinter, P. J. Jr., Reginato, R. J., and Hatfield, J. L. 1981. Normalizing the
stress-degree-day concept for environmental variability, Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 32:
249–256.
19. Jackson, R. D., Idso, S. B., Reginato, R. J., and Pinter, P. J. Jr. 1981. Canopy temperature as a crop
water stress indicator, Water Resources Research, 17: 1133–1138.
20. Jackson, R. D., Reginato, R. J., and Idso, S. B. 1984. Wheat canopy temperatures: A practical tool
for evaluating water requirements, Water Resources Research, 13: 651–656.
21. Jankó Szép, I., Mika, J., and Dunkel, Z. 2005. Palmer drought index as soil moisture indicator:
Physical interpretation, statistical behaviour and relation to global climate, Physics and Chemistry
of the Earth, 30: 231–243.
22. Kanellou, E. C., Domenikiotis, C., and Dalezios, N. R. 2009. Description of conventional and satel-
lite drought indices, in: Tsakiris, G., ed., PRODIM final report, EC, European Commission (EC),
Luxembourg City, Luxembourg, pp. 23–59, 448pp.
23. Karl, T. R. 1986. The sensitivity of the Palmer Drought Severity Index and Palmer’s Z-index to their
calibration coefficients including potential evapotranspiration, Journal of Applied Meteorology,
25(1): 77–86.
24. Keyantash, J. and Dracup, J. A. 2002. The quantification of drought: An evaluation of drought
indices, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 83(8): 1167–1180.
25. Lakatos, M., Szentimrey, T., and Bihari, Z. 2010. Analysis of long time Standard Precipitation
Index series to detect the drought frequency changes in Hungary, European Conference on Applied
Climatology (ECAC), September 13–17, Zürich, Switzerland.
Meteorological Drought Indices 43

26. McKee, T. B., Doesken, N. J., and Kleist, J. 1993. The relationship of drought frequency and dura-
tion to timescales, Preprints, Eighth Conference on Applied Climatology, American Meteorological
Society, Anaheim, CA, pp. 179–184.
27. McVicar, T. R. and Jupp, D. L. B. 1998. The current and potential operational uses of remote sens-
ing to aid decisions on drought exceptional circumstances in Australia: A review, Agricultural
Systems, 57(3): 399–468.
28. Mirabbasi, R., Anagnostou, E. N., Fakheri-Fard, A. Dinpashoh, Y., and Eslamian, S. 2013. Analysis
of meteorological drought in northwest Iran using the Joint Deficit Index, Journal of Hydrology,
492: 35–48.
29. Palmer, W. C. 1965. Meteorological drought, U.S. Weather Bureau Research Paper 45, Silver
Springs, MD, 58pp.
30. Ped, L. A. 1975. On the new drought and over-moistening index (in Russian), Transactions of the
USSR Hydrometeorological Center, Vol. 156, Moscow, Soviet Union, pp. 19–39.
31. Rostamian, R., Eslamian, S., and Farzaneh, M. R. 2013. Application of standardised precipita-
tion index for predicting meteorological drought intensity in Beheshtabad watershed, central Iran,
International Journal of Hydrology Science and Technology, 3(1): 63–77.
32. Seguin, B., Courault, D., and Guérif, M. 1994. Surface temperature and evapotranspiration:
Application of local scale methods to regional scales using satellite data, Remote Sensing of
Environment, 48: 1–25.
33. Selyaninov, G. T. 1958. The nature and dynamics of the droughts, Droughts in the USSR, their
nature, recurrences and impact on crops yields (in Russian), Gidrometeoizdat, Leningrad, Soviet
Union.
34. Silverman, B. A. December 1986. Static mode seeding of summer cumuli: A review, in: Braham,
R.R. Jr., ed., Precipitation Enhancement: A Scientific Challenge, Meteorological Monographs, Vol.
21(43), AMS (American Meteorological Society), Boston, MA, pp. 7–24.
35. Sivakumar, M. V. K., Motha, R. P., and Das, H. P., eds. 2005. Natural Disaster and Extreme Events
in Agriculture, Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, 367pp.
36. Sivakumar, M. V. K., Wilhite, D. A., Svoboda, M. D., Hayes, M., and Motha, R. 2010. Drought
and meteorological droughts, in: Global Assessment Report: GAR 2011 on Disaster Risk Reduction,
UNISDR, Geneva, Switzerland, 26pp.
37. Skvortsov, A. A. 1950. On the question of heat and water exchange in the surface air (in Russian),
Transactions of Middle Asian State University, Vol. 22, Moscow Soviet Union, No. 6.
38. Steinemann, A., Hayes, M. A., and Cavalcanti, L. 2005. Drought indicators and triggers, in:
Wilhite, D. A., ed., Drought and Water Crises: Science Technology and Management Issues, Marcel
Dekker Inc., New York, pp. 71–90.
39. Svoboda, M. et al. 2002. The drought monitor, Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society,
83(8): 1181–1190.
40. Thenkabail, P. S., Gamage, M. S. D. N., and Smakhtin, V. U. 2004. The use of remote sensing data
for drought assessment and monitoring in Southwest Asia, Research report, International Water
Management Institute, No. 85, IWMI (International Water Management Institute), Colombo, Sri
Lanka, pp. 1–25.
41. Thornthwaite, C. W. 1948. An approach toward a rational classification of climate, Geographical
Review, 38: 55–94.
42. Tsakiris, G. and Vangelis, H. 2005. Establishing a drought index incorporating evapotraspiration,
European Water, 9(10): 3–11.
43. Tsiros, E., Domenikitios, C., and Dalezios, N. R. 2006. Aridity mapping with the use of NDVI and
satellite derived degree days, in: Dalezios, N. R. and Tzortzios, S., eds., Third HAICTA International
Conference on Information System in Sustainable Agriculture, COST-University of Thessaly, Volos,
Greece, pp. 853–865.
44 Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity

44. Vicente-Serrano, S. M., Begueria, S., and Lopez-Moreno, J. I. 2010. A multiscalar drought index
sensitive to global warming: The standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index, Journal of
Climate, 23: 1696–1718.
45. Wagner, W., Borgeaud, M., and Noll, J. 1996. Soil moisture mapping with the ERS scatterometer,
Earth Observation Quarterly, 54: 4–7.
46. Wilhite, D. A. and Glantz, M. H. 1985. Understanding the drought phenomenon: The role of
definitions, Water International, 10: 111–120.
47. Wilhite, D. A. 2005. The role of disaster preparedness in national planning with specific reference
to droughts, in: Sivakumar, M. V. K., Motha, R. P., and Das, H. P., Natural Disasters and Extreme
Events in Agriculture, Springer, New York, pp. 23–37.
48. Wilhite, D. A. 2009. The role of monitoring as a component of preparedness planning: Delivery
of information and decision support tools, in: Iglesias, A., Cancelliere, A., Cubillo, F., Garrote, L.,
and Wilhite, D., eds., Coping with Drought Risk in Agriculture and Water Supply Systems: Drought
Management and Policy Development in the Mediterranean, Springer Publishers, Dordrecht,
the Netherlands.
49. WMO. 1975. Drought and agriculture, WMO Technical Note 138, Geneva, Switzerland.
50. WMO. 1992. International meteorological vocabulary, WMO No. 182, Geneva, Switzerland.
51. WMO. 2011. Lincoln declaration on Drought Indices, Proceedings of Expert Meeting, June 2–4,
2010, Murcia, Spain.
52. Wu, H. and Wilhite, D. A. 2004. An operational agricultural drought risk assessment model for
Nebraska, USA, Natural Hazards, 33: 1–21.