Spatio-Temporal Drought Risk Analysis Using GIS-Based Input Output Modeling

  • Sheree Pagsuyoin
  • Joost SantosEmail author
  • Gustavo Salcedo
  • Christian Yip
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)


Recent studies in the area of disaster risk management emphasize the increasing likelihood and adverse consequences of droughts. Droughts can have widespread severe impacts; for example, in 2016, the northeastern region of the United States experienced record levels of rainfall shortage, forcing regional government agencies to issue warnings and emergency advisories to the public. During drought events, the economic losses due to water shortage and government-mandated restriction measures create costly cascading effects due to the interconnected and interdependent nature of the economic sectors. Such sectors have different degrees of dependence on water, and often there is a lack of coordination in implementing sector-specific resilience measures, which makes the drought recovery management a complex and daunting task. Indeed, water is a critical resource and it is essential in producing a myriad number of goods and services in the economy. In the current chapter, the authors develop a new modeling framework for drought risk management by integrating spatial analysis and dynamic input-output modeling to better understand the direct and indirect effects of drought scenarios on interdependent sectors of a regional economy. A decision support tool that utilizes the geographic information systems (GIS) platform was also developed to perform the following functions: (1) model the time-varying impacts of drought scenarios on a regional economy, (2) simulate the responses of individual sectors throughout various stages of the drought recovery timeline, and (3) estimate the regional economic losses and potential benefits of implementing different categories of drought management policies. The utility of the integrated IO-GIS framework and decision support tool is demonstrated in a case study of the historic and widespread drought that occurred in the State of Massachusetts in 2016.


  1. Addams L, Boccaletti G, Kerlin M et al (2009) Charting our water future: economic frameworks to inform decision-making. McKinsey, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Albala-Bertrand JM (2013) Disasters and the networked economy. Routledge, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson C, Santos JR, Haimes YY (2007) A risk-based input-output methodology for measuring the effects of the August 2003 northeast blackout. Econ Syst Res 19:183–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Avelino AFT (2017) Disaggregating input–output tables in time: the temporal input–output framework. Econ Syst Res 29:313–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blignaut J, Heerden JV (2009) The impact of water scarcity on economic development initiatives. Water SA 35(4):415–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. CA Exec. Order No. B-29-15 (April 1, 2015),
  7. Cazcarro I, Duarte R, Choliz JS (2013) Multiregional input-output model for the evaluation of Spanish water flows. Environ Sci Technol 47:12275–12283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dietzenbacher E, Lahr ML (2004) Wassily Leontief and input-output economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dietzenbacher E, Miller RE (2015) Reflections on the inoperability input–output model. Econ Syst Res 27:478–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs and Adaptation Advisory Committee (2011) Massachusetts Climate Change Adaptation Report. 128 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. Haimes YY (1991) Total risk management. Risk Anal 11(2):169–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Haimes YY, Jiang P (2001) Leontief-based model of risk in complex interconnected infrastructures. J Infrastruct Syst 7(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holling C (1973) Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 4:1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Horridge M, Madden J, Wittwer G (2005) The impact of the 2002–2003 drought on Australia. J Policy Model 27(3):285–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Howitt RE, MacEwan D, Medellín-Azuara J et al (2005) Agricultural and environmental policy models: calibration, estimation and optimization. University of California Davis, UC DavisGoogle Scholar
  16. Hubacek K, Sun L (2005) Economic and societal changes in China and their effects on water use: a scenario analysis. J Ind Ecol 9:187–200. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones RN, Whetton PH, Walsh KJE et al (2002) Future impacts of climate variability, climate change and land use change on water resources in the Murray Darling Basin: overview and draft program of research. Murray-Darling Basin Commission, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  18. Kaplan S, Garrick BJ (1981) On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Anal 1:11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leontief W (1936) Quantitative input and output relations in the economic system of the United States. Rev Econ Stat 18(3):105–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lian C, Haimes YY (2006) Managing the risk of terrorism to interdependent infrastructure systems through the dynamic inoperability input-output model. Syst Eng 9:241–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lowell Water Utilities. Personal communication, 31 October 2016Google Scholar
  22. Martín L, Justo JB (2015) Análisis, prevención y resolución de conflictos por el agua en América Latina y el Caribe. Serie Recurso Naturales e Infraestructura. United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, Santiago. Available via Accessed 9 March 2017
  23. Martin-Carrasco F, Garrote L, Iglesias A, Mediero L (2013) Diagnosing causes of water scarcity in complex water resources systems and identifying risk management actions. Water Resour Manage 27:1693–1705. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs and Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MA EEA) (2013) Massachusetts Drought Management Plan, 41 ppGoogle Scholar
  25. Massachusetts Office of Water Resources (MAOWR). Personal communication, 25 October 2016Google Scholar
  26. MATLAB version 2017a (2017) MathWorks, Inc. Natick, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller RE, Blair PD (2009) Input-output analysis: foundations and extensions, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. National Drought Mitigation Center (2017) U.S Drought Monitor Massachusetts. Accessed 19 Feb 2017
  29. Okuyama Y (2007) Economic modeling for disaster impact analysis: past, present and future. Econ Syst Res 19(2):115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Oosterhaven J (2017) On the limited usability of the inoperability IO model. Econ Syst Res 29:452–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2012) Environmental outlook to 2050: the consequences of inaction. OECD, Paris.
  32. Orsi MJ, Santos JR (2010) Probabilistic modeling of workforce-based disruptions and input-output analysis of interdependent ripple effects. Econ Syst Res 22:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pagsuyoin SAT, Santos JR (2015) Modeling the effects of drought in urban economies using input-output analysis. Br J Environ Clim Change 5(2):134–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Paulson RW, Chase EB, Roberts RS, Moody DW (1991) National water summary 1988-89: hydrologic events and floods and droughts. United States Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper 2375Google Scholar
  35. Perrings C (2001) Resilience and sustainability. In: Folmer H, Gabel HL, Gerking S, Rose A (eds) Frontiers of environmental economics. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 319–341Google Scholar
  36. Postel SL (2000) Entering an era of water scarcity: the challenges ahead. Ecol Appl 10(4):941–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Resurreccion JZ, Santos JR (2013) Uncertainty modeling of hurricane-based disruptions to interdependent economic and infrastructure systems. Nat Hazard 69:1497–1518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rockstrom J, Steffen W, Noone K et al (2009) A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461:472–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rose A (2009) Economic resilience to disasters: community and Regional Resilience Institute (CARRI) Research Report 8. CARRI Institute, Oakridge, TNGoogle Scholar
  40. Rose A, Liao SY (2005) Modeling regional economic resilience to disasters: a computable general equilibrium analysis of water service disruptions. J Reg Sci 45(1):75–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rowland M (2005) A framework for resolving the transboundary water allocation conflict conundrum. Ground Water 43(5):700–705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roy SB, Chen L, Girvetz EH, Maurer EP, Mills WB, Grieb TM (2012) Projecting water withdrawal and supply for future decades in the U.S. under climate change scenarios. Environ Sci Technol 46(5):2545–2556. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Santos JR, Haimes YY (2004) Modeling the demand reduction input-output inoperability due to terrorism of interconnected infrastructures. Risk Anal 24:1437–1451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Santos JR, Pagsuyoin SA, Herrera LC, Tan RG, Yu KDS (2014) Analysis of drought risk management strategies using dynamic inoperability input-output modeling and event tree analysis. Environ Syst Decis 34(4):492–506. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schlosser CA, Strzepek K, Gao X et al (2014) The future of global water stress: an integrated assessment. Earths Future 2:341–361. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Seung CK, Harris TR, Englin J, Netusil N (2000) Impacts of water reallocation: a combined computable general equilibrium and recreation demand model approach. Annu Reg Sci 34:473–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shiklomanov I (1993) World fresh water resources. In: Gleick P (ed) Water in crisis: a guide to the world’s fresh water resources. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  48. Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (2018) Treatment of Wastewater and Drinking Water. Accessed 17 Jan 2018
  49. UN (2016) Global sustainable development report 2016. Department of Economic and Social Affairs, New York. Available via Accessed 19 Feb 2017Google Scholar
  50. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2015) Adoption of the Paris Agreement. Accessed 20 Feb 2017
  51. UN World Water Assessment Program (UNWWAP) (2016) The United Nations World Water Development Report 2016: water and jobs. UNESCO, Paris. Available via Accessed 19 Feb 2017Google Scholar
  52. US Bureau of Economic Analysis (2015) National Economic Accounts. Accessed 20 Feb 2017
  53. US Census Bureau (2016) QuickFacts Beta: Massachusetts. Accessed 4 Mar 2017
  54. US Government Accountability Office (2014) Supply concerns continue, and uncertainties complicate planning (GAO Publication No. 14-430). U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  55. US Intelligence Community Assessment (2012) Global water security. Accessed 17 Jan 2018
  56. Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (2017) Drought assessment and response plan. Available at responseplan.pdf. Accessed 21 Feb 2017
  57. Ward FA, Michelsen A (2002) The economic value of water in agriculture: concepts and policy applications. Water Policy 4(5):423–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ward F, Pulido-Velazquez M (2012) Economic costs of sustaining water supplies: findings from the Rio Grande. Water Resour Manag 26(10):2883–2909CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Webb G, Tierney K, Dahlhamer J (2000) Business and disasters: empirical patterns and unanswered questions. Nat Hazard Rev 1:83–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. World Wildlife Fund (WWF) (2017) Water scarcity. Accessed 19 Feb 2017

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sheree Pagsuyoin
    • 1
  • Joost Santos
    • 2
    Email author
  • Gustavo Salcedo
    • 1
  • Christian Yip
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of Massachusetts-LowellLowellUSA
  2. 2.Department of Engineering Management and Systems EngineeringGeorge Washington UniversityWashingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations