OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Nature
01, 2020;577 (7790): 364-369.

Importance and vulnerability of the world's water towers.

W W Immerzeel, A F Lutz, M Andrade, A Bahl, H Biemans, T Bolch, S Hyde, S Brumby, B J Davies, A C Elmore, A Emmer, M Feng, A Fernández, U Haritashya, J S Kargel, M Koppes, P D A Kraaijenbrink, A V Kulkarni, P A Mayewski, S Nepal, P Pacheco, T H Painter, F Pellicciotti, H Rajaram, S Rupper, A Sinisalo, A B Shrestha, D Viviroli, Y Wada, C Xiao, T Yao, J E M Baillie
Author Information
  1. W W Immerzeel: Faculty of Geosciences, Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. w.w.immerzeel@uu.nl.
  2. A F Lutz: Faculty of Geosciences, Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. a.f.lutz@uu.nl.
  3. M Andrade: Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, Institute for Physics Research, La Paz, Bolivia.
  4. A Bahl: National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA.
  5. H Biemans: Wageningen University and Research, Water and Food Group, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
  6. T Bolch: School of Geography and Sustainable Development, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.
  7. S Hyde: National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA.
  8. S Brumby: National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA.
  9. B J Davies: Centre for Quaternary Research, Department of Geography, Royal Holloway University of London, Egham, UK.
  10. A C Elmore: National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA.
  11. A Emmer: Czech Academy of Sciences, Global Change Research Institute, Brno, Czech Republic.
  12. M Feng: Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
  13. A Fernández: Department of Geography, Universidad de Concepción, Concepción, Chile.
  14. U Haritashya: Department of Geology, University of Dayton, Dayton, OH, USA.
  15. J S Kargel: Planetary Science Institute, Tucson, AZ, USA.
  16. M Koppes: Department of Geography, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
  17. P D A Kraaijenbrink: Faculty of Geosciences, Department of Physical Geography, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
  18. A V Kulkarni: Indian Institute of Science, Divecha Center for Climate Change, Bangalore, India.
  19. P A Mayewski: University of Maine, Climate Change Institute, Orono, ME, USA.
  20. S Nepal: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  21. P Pacheco: Agua Sustentable, Irpavi, La Paz, Bolivia.
  22. T H Painter: Joint Institute for Regional Earth System Science and Engineering, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  23. F Pellicciotti: Swiss Federal Research Institute WSL, Birmensdorf, Switzerland.
  24. H Rajaram: Johns Hopkins University, Department of Environmental Health and Engineering, Baltimore, MD, USA.
  25. S Rupper: University of Utah, Department of Geography, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
  26. A Sinisalo: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  27. A B Shrestha: International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development, Kathmandu, Nepal.
  28. D Viviroli: University of Zurich, Department of Geography, Zurich, Switzerland.
  29. Y Wada: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
  30. C Xiao: State Key Laboratory of Earth Surface Processes and Resource Ecology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.
  31. T Yao: Institute of Tibetan Plateau Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
  32. J E M Baillie: National Geographic Society, Washington, DC, USA.
PMID: 31816624 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1822-y

Abstract

Mountains are the water towers of the world, supplying a substantial part of both natural and anthropogenic water demands. They are highly sensitive and prone to climate change, yet their importance and vulnerability have not been quantified at the global scale. Here we present a global water tower index (WTI), which ranks all water towers in terms of their water-supplying role and the downstream dependence of ecosystems and society. For each water tower, we assess its vulnerability related to water stress, governance, hydropolitical tension and future climatic and socio-economic changes. We conclude that the most important (highest WTI) water towers are also among the most vulnerable, and that climatic and socio-economic changes will affect them profoundly. This could negatively impact 1.9 billion people living in (0.3 billion) or directly downstream of (1.6 billion) mountainous areas. Immediate action is required to safeguard the future of the world's most important and vulnerable water towers.

References

  1. Viviroli, D., Dürr, H. H., Messerli, B., Meybeck, M. & Weingartner, R. Mountains of the world, water towers for humanity: typology, mapping, and global significance. Wat. Resour. Res. 43, 1–13 (2007).
  2. Immerzeel, W. W., Van Beek, L. P. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Climate change will affect the Asian water towers. Science 328, 1382–1385 (2010). [PMID: 20538947]
  3. Viviroli, D. et al. Climate change and mountain water resources: overview and recommendations for research, management and policy. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 15, 471–504 (2011).
  4. IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate https://www.ipcc.ch/report/srocc/ (IPCC, 2019).
  5. Lehner, B., Verdin, K. & Jarvis, A. New global hydrography derived from spaceborne elevation data. Eos 89, 93–104 (2008).
  6. Körner, C. et al. A global inventory of mountains for bio-geographical applications. Alp. Bot. 127, 1–15 (2017).
  7. Hall, D. K. & Riggs, G. A. MODIS/Terra Snow Cover Monthly L3 Global 0.05Deg CMG Dataset Version 6 https://nsidc.org/data/MOD10CM (2015).
  8. Pfeffer, W. et al. The Randolph Glacier Inventory: a globally complete inventory of glaciers. J. Glaciol. 60, 537–552 (2014).
  9. Klein Goldewijk, K., Beusen, A., Van Drecht, G. & De Vos, M. The HYDE 3.1 spatially explicit database of human-induced global land-use change over the past 12,000 years. Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr. 20, 73–86 (2011).
  10. Xiao, C.-D., Wang, S. J. & Qin, D. H. A preliminary study of cryosphere service function and value evaluation. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 6, 181–187 (2015).
  11. Wang, X., Liu, S. W. & Zhang, J. L. A new look at roles of the cryosphere in sustainable development. Adv. Clim. Chang. Res. 10, 124–131 (2019).
  12. Chape, S., Spalding, M. D. & Jenkins, M. D. The World’s Protected Areas (UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 2008).
  13. Körner, C. & Paulsen, J. A world-wide study of high altitude treeline temperatures. J. Biogeogr. 31, 713–732 (2004).
  14. Körner, C., Paulsen, J. & Spehn, E. M. A definition of mountains and their bioclimatic belts for global comparisons of biodiversity data. Alp. Bot. 121, 73–78 (2011).
  15. Nordhaus, W. D. Geography and macroeconomics: new data and new findings. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. 103, 3510–3517 (2006). [PMID: 16473945]
  16. Pepin, N. et al. Elevation-dependent warming in mountain regions of the world. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5, 424–430 (2015).
  17. Zemp, M. et al. Global glacier mass changes and their contributions to sea-level rise from 1961 to 2016. Nature 568, 382–386 (2019). [PMID: 30962533]
  18. Hammond, J. C., Saavedra, F. A. & Kampf, S. K. Global snow zone maps and trends in snow persistence 2001–2016. Int. J. Climatol. 38, 4369–4383 (2018).
  19. Bormann, K. J., Brown, R. D., Derksen, C. & Painter, T. H. Estimating snow-cover trends from space. Nat. Clim. Chang. 8, 924–928 (2018).
  20. Sarangi, C. et al. Impact of light-absorbing particles on snow albedo darkening and associated radiative forcing over High Mountain Asia: high resolution WRF-Chem modeling and new satellite observations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-2018-979 (2018).
  21. Painter, T. H. et al. Impact of disturbed desert soils on duration of mountain snow cover. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L12502 (2007).
  22. Lutz, A. F., Immerzeel, W. W., Shrestha, A. B. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Consistent increase in High Asia’s runoff due to increasing glacier melt and precipitation. Nat. Clim. Chang. 4, 587–592 (2014).
  23. Huss, M. et al. Toward mountains without permanent snow and ice. Earth. Future 5, 418–435 (2017).
  24. Kargel, J. S. S. et al. Geomorphic and geologic controls of geohazards induced by Nepal’s 2015 Gorkha earthquake. Science 351, aac8353 (2016). [PMID: 26676355]
  25. Kirschbaum, D. et al. The state of remote sensing capabilities of cascading hazards over high mountain Asia. Front. Earth Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2019.00197 (2019).
  26. Guha-Sapir, D., Below, R. & Hoyois, P. EM-DAT: International Disaster Database www.emdat.be (2019).
  27. Mal, S. Climate Change, Extreme Events and Disaster Risk Reduction (Springer, 2018).
  28. Mann, M. E. et al. Influence of anthropogenic climate change on planetary wave resonance and extreme weather events. Sci. Rep. 7, 45242 (2017). [PMID: 28345645]
  29. Fischer, E. M. & Knutti, R. Anthropogenic contribution to global occurrence of heavy-precipitation and high-temperature extremes. Nat. Clim. Chang. 5, 560–564 (2015).
  30. Haeberli, W., Schaub, Y. & Huggel, C. Increasing risks related to landslides from degrading permafrost into new lakes in de-glaciating mountain ranges. Geomorphology 293, 405–417 (2017).
  31. Biemans, H. et al. Importance of snow and glacier meltwater for agriculture on the Indo-Gangetic Plain. Nat. Sustain. 2, 594–601 (2019).
  32. Hersbach, H. et al. Operational global reanalysis: progress, future directions and synergies with NWP. ECMWF ERA Report Series No. 27, https://www.ecmwf.int/node/18765 (ECMWF, 2018).
  33. Wada, Y., De Graaf, I. E. M. & van Beek, L. P. H. High-resolution modeling of human and climate impacts on global water resources. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 8, 735–763 (2016).
  34. Wada, Y. et al. Global depletion of groundwater resources. Geophys. Res. Lett. 37, https://doi.org/10.1029/2010GL044571 (2010).
  35. Wada, Y., Van Beek, L. P. H. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Nonsustainable groundwater sustaining irrigation: a global assessment. Wat. Resour. Res. 48, https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR010562 (2012).
  36. Immerzeel, W. W. & Bierkens, M. F. P. Asia’s water balance. Nat. Geosci. 5, 841–842 (2012).
  37. De Stefano, L., Petersen-Perlman, J. D., Sproles, E. A., Eynard, J. & Wolf, A. T. Assessment of transboundary river basins for potential hydro-political tensions. Glob. Environ. Change 45, 35–46 (2017).
  38. Hofste, R. W. et al. Aqueduct 3.0: Updated Decision-Relevant Global Water Risk Indicators. Technical Note https://www.wri.org/publication/aqueduct-30 (World Resources Institute, 2019).
  39. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A. & Mastruzzi, M. The Worldwide Governance Indicators. Methodology and Analytical Issues. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 5430 https://elibrary.worldbank.org/doi/abs/10.1596/1813-9450-5430 (The World Bank Development Research Group, 2010).
  40. Taylor, K. E., Stouffer, R. J. & Meehl, G. A. An overview of CMIP5 and the experiment design. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 93, 485–498 (2012).
  41. Murakami, D. & Yamagata, Y. Estimation of Gridded Population and GDP Scenarios with Spatially Explicit Statistical Downscaling. Sustainability 11, 2106 (2019).
  42. Wijngaard, R. R. et al. Climate change vs. socio-economic development: understanding the South-Asian water gap. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 22, 6297–6321 (2018).
  43. Rockström, J. et al. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol. Soc. 14, 32 (2009).
  44. Jaramillo, F. & Destouni, G. Comment on “Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet”. Science 348, 1217 (2015). [PMID: 26068843]
  45. Springmann, M. et al. Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature 562, 519–525 (2018). [PMID: 30305731]
  46. Roy, J. et al. Exploring futures of the Hindu Kush Himalaya: scenarios and pathways. In The Hindu Kush Himalaya Assessment: Mountains, Climate Change, Sustainability and People (eds Wester, P., Mishra, A., Mukherji, A. & Shrestha, A. B.) 99–125 (Springer International Publishing, 2019).
  47. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda For Sustainable Development. A/RES/70/1 Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?page=view&type=111&nr=8496&menu=35 (UN, 2015).
  48. Farinotti, D. et al. A consensus estimate for the ice thickness distribution of all glaciers on Earth. Nat. Geosci. 12, 168–173 (2019).
  49. World Glacier Monitoring Service Fluctuations of Glaciers (FoG) Database https://doi.org/10.5904/wgms-fog-2018-06 (2018).
  50. Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I. & Schmitt, O. Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach. Nat. Commun. 7, 13603 (2016). [PMID: 27976671]
  51. Gleeson, T., Wada, Y., Bierkens, M. F. P. & Van Beek, L. P. H. Water balance of global aquifers revealed by groundwater footprint. Nature 488, 197–200 (2012). [PMID: 22874965]
  52. Smakhtin, V., Revenga, C. & Döll, P. A pilot global assessment of environmental water requirements and scarcity. Water Int. 29, 307–317 (2004).
  53. Harris, I., Jones, P. D., Osborn, T. J. & Lister, D. H. Updated high-resolution grids of monthly climatic observations—the CRU TS3.10 dataset. Int. J. Climatol. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.3711 (2013).
  54. Dee, D. P. et al. The ERA-Interim reanalysis: configuration and performance of the data assimilation system. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 137, 553–597 (2011).
  55. Weedon, G. P. et al. The WFDEI meteorological forcing data set: WATCH Forcing Data methodology applied to ERA-Interim reanalysis data. Wat. Resour. Res. 50, 7505–7514 (2014).
  56. Weedon, G. P. et al. Creation of the WATCH Forcing Data and its use to assess global and regional reference crop evaporation over land during the twentieth century. J. Hydrometeorol. 12, 823–848 (2011).
  57. Schneider, U. et al. GPCC’s new land surface precipitation climatology based on quality-controlled in situ data and its role in quantifying the global water cycle. Theor. Appl. Climatol. 115, 15–40 (2014).
  58. Uppala, S. M. et al. The ERA-40 re-analysis. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 131, 2961–3012 (2005).
  59. Kalnay, E. et al. The NCEP/NCAR 40-Year Reanalysis Project. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 77, 437–471 (1996).
  60. Martens, B. et al. GLEAM v3: Satellite-based land evaporation and root-zone soil moisture. Geosci. Model Dev. 10, 1903–1925 (2017).
  61. Rienecker, M. M. et al. MERRA: NASA’s modern-era retrospective analysis for research and applications. J. Clim. 24, 3624–3648 (2011).
  62. Sutanudjaja, E. H. et al. PCR-GLOBWB 2: a 5 arcmin global hydrological and water resources model. Geosci. Model Dev. 11, 2429–2453 (2018).
  63. Riggs, G. A., Hall, D. K. & Román, M. O. Overview of NASA’s MODIS and VIIRS Snow-Cover Earth System Data Records. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 9, 765–777 https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-9-765-2017 (2017).
  64. Wada, Y. et al. Modeling global water use for the 21st century: the Water Futures and Solutions (WFaS) initiative and its approaches. Geosci. Model Dev. 9, 175–222 (2016).
  65. Wada, Y. et al. Multimodel projections and uncertainties of irrigation water demand under climate change. Geophys. Res. Lett. 40, 4626–4632 (2013).
  66. van Vuuren, D. P. et al. The representative concentration pathways: an overview. Clim. Change 109, 5–31 (2011).
  67. O’Neill, B. C. et al. The roads ahead: narratives for shared socioeconomic pathways describing world futures in the 21st century. Glob. Environ. Change 42, 169–180 (2017).
  68. Kummu, M., Taka, M. & Guillaume, J. H. A. Gridded global datasets for gross domestic product and human development index over 1990-2015. Sci. Data 5, 180004 (2018). [PMID: 29406518]
  69. McDowell, G. et al. Adaptation action and research in glaciated mountain systems: Are they enough to meet the challenge of climate change? Glob. Environ. Change 54, 19–30 (2019).
  70. Conway, D. et al. The need for bottom-up assessments of climate risks and adaptation in climate-sensitive regions. Nat. Clim. Chang. 9, 503–511 (2019).

MeSH Term

Altitude
Conservation of Natural Resources
Humans
Socioeconomic Factors
Water
Water Supply

Chemicals

Water
Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Article has an altmetric score of 670

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0watertowersvulnerabilitybillionglobaltowerWTIdownstreamfutureclimaticsocio-economicchangesimportantvulnerable1world'sMountainsworldsupplyingsubstantialpartnaturalanthropogenicdemandshighlysensitiveproneclimatechangeyetimportancequantifiedscalepresentindexrankstermswater-supplyingroledependenceecosystemssocietyassessrelatedstressgovernancehydropoliticaltensionconcludehighestalsoamongwillaffectprofoundlynegativelyimpact9peopleliving03directly6mountainousareasImmediateactionrequiredsafeguardImportance

Similar Articles

Cited By