Combining the standardized precipitation index and climatic water deficit in characterizing droughts: a case study in Romania

  • Cr. PaltineanuEmail author
  • I. F. Mihailescu
  • Zoia Prefac
  • Carmen Dragota
  • Felicia Vasenciuc
  • Nicola Claudia
Original Paper


This paper characterizes droughts in Romania using the approach of both the standardized precipitation index (SPI) and climatic water deficit (WD). The values of the main climatic factors (rainfall, temperature, reference evapotranspiration, etc.) were obtained from 192 weather stations in various regions of Romania. Penman–Monteith reference evapotranspiration (ETo-PM) was used to calculate WD as the difference between precipitation (P) and ETo-PM. SPI was calculated from precipitation values. There is a clear difference between drought and aridity. Drought occurrence determines higher WD values for plains and plateaus and lower climatic excess water (EW) values for high mountains in Romania, depending on the aridity of the specific region considered and drought severity. WD calculated as mean values for both normal conditions and, for all locations studied, various types of drought was correlated with mean annual precipitation and temperature, respectively. The combined approach of WD and SPI was mainly carried out for periods of 1 year, but such studies could also be done for shorter periods like months, quarters, or growing season. The most arid regions did not necessarily coincide with areas of the most severe drought, as there were no correlations between WD and SPI and no altitude-based SPI zones around the Carpathian Mountains, as is the case for other climate characteristics, soils and vegetation. Water resource problems arise where both SPI values characterize extremely droughty periods and WD values are greatly below −200 mm/year. This combined use of SPI and WD characterizes the dryness of a region better than one factor alone and should be used for better management of water in agriculture in Romania and also other countries with similar climate characteristics.


Water Deficit Romania Arid Region Standardize Precipitation Index Reference Evapotranspiration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This paper partly resulted from the AGRAL-116 Project, coordinated by Dr. Andrei Canarache from the Research Institute for Soil Science and Agrochemistry (Bucharest, Romania) and financed by the Ministry of Education and Research from Romania. We thank both to the coordinator and the financing authority, and also to the National Drought Mitigation Center, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, which offered the software computing the SPI, and Prof. Dr. John Catt from the Department of Geography, University College London for his useful comments and suggestions which helped improve the shape and content of this paper.


  1. Aïvazian S (1970) Étude statistique des dépendances. Mir, Moscow, Russia, 236 ppGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen RG, Pereira L, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration. Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. FAO Irrig Drain Pap 56, FAO, Rome, 301 ppGoogle Scholar
  3. Canarache A (2004) Indicatori climatici si regimuri de umiditate si temperatura a solului. Stiinta Solului Seria III 38(1–2):66–78Google Scholar
  4. Canarache A, Dumitru S (2002) Impact of soil/land properties on the effects of drought and on soil rating. In: Proceedings, Central and Eastern European Workshop on Drought Mitigation, Budapest-Felsögöd, Hungary, 12–15th April 2000Google Scholar
  5. Clima RSR (1966) Date climatologice, vol II. Comitetul de Stat al Apelor de pe langa Consiliul de Ministri, Institutul Meteorologic, Bucharest, 277 ppGoogle Scholar
  6. Cressie NAC (1990) The origins of Kriging. Math Geol 22:239–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1992) GSLIB: geostatistical software library and user’s guide. Oxford University Press, New York, 338 ppGoogle Scholar
  8. Do ÓA (2005) Regional drought analysis and mitigation using the SPI. ICID 21st European Regional Conference, Topic 4. Frankfurt (Oder), Germany and Slubice, Poland, 15–19 May 2005, CD-RomGoogle Scholar
  9. Edwards DC, McKee TB (1997) Characteristics of the 20th century drought in the United States at multiple time scales. Climatology Report Number 97-2, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. Geografia Romaniei (1983) Geografia Fizica, vol. I, Institutul de Geografie Bucureşti, Academiei RSR, Bucharest, 664 ppGoogle Scholar
  11. Giddings L, Soto M, Rutherford BM, Maarouf A (2005) Standardized precipitation index zones in Mexico. Atmósfera 2005:33–56. Cited 27 September 2008
  12. Guttman NB (1999) Accepting the Standardized Precipitation Index: a calculation algorithm. J Am Water Resour Assoc 35:311–322Google Scholar
  13. Hagman G (1984) Prevention better than cure: report on human and natural disasters in the third world. Swedish Red Cross, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  14. Jensen ME, Burman RD, Allen RG (eds) (1990) Evapotranspiration and irrigation water requirements. ASCE Manual 70, ASCE, New York, 332 ppGoogle Scholar
  15. Keyantash J, Dracup JA (2002) The quantification of drought: an evaluation of drought indices. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 83:1167–1180Google Scholar
  16. Marica AC, Busuioc A (2004) The potential of climate change on the main components of water balance relating to maize crop. Rom J Meteorol 6(1–2):50–57Google Scholar
  17. McKee TB, Doesken NJ, Kleist J (1993) The relationship of drought frequency and duration to time scales. In: 8th Conference on Applied Climatology. Anaheim, CA, USA, 17–22 January 1993, pp 179–184Google Scholar
  18. McKee TB, Doesken NJ, Kleist J (1995) Drought monitoring with multiple time scales. In: 9th Conference on Applied Climatology, Dallas, TX, 15-20 January 1995, pp 233–236Google Scholar
  19. Monteith JL (1965) Evaporation and the environment. In: The state and movement of water in living organisms, XIXth Symposium Soc. for Exp. Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 205–234Google Scholar
  20. Nain AS, Kersebaum KCh, Mirschel W (2005) Are meteorological parameters based drought indices enough for agricultural drought monitoring: a comparative study of drought monitoring with SPI and crop simulation model. ICID 21st European Regional Conference, Topic 4, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany and Slubice, Poland, 15–19 May 2005, CD ROMGoogle Scholar
  21. Paltineanu Cr, Mihailescu IF, Prefac Z, Popescu M (2006) Stabilitatea temporala relativa a temperaturii medii si corelarea acesteia intre statiile meteorologice din Romania. Anal Univ Spiru Haret Ser Geogr 9:21–26Google Scholar
  22. Paltineanu C, Mihailescu IF, Seceleanu I, Dragota C, Vasenciuc F (2007) Using aridity indexes to describe some climate and soil features in Eastern Europe: a Romanian case study. Theor Appl Climatol 90(3–4):263–274. doi: 10.1007/s00704-007-0295-3
  23. Paulo AA, Ferreira E, Pereira LS (2005) Stochastic Prediction of SPI Drought Class Transitions. ICID 21st European Regional Conference, Topic 4, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany and Slubice, Poland, 15–19 May 2005, CD ROMGoogle Scholar
  24. Pereira LS, Paulo AA, Rosa RD (2005) A modification of the Palmer drought stress index for Mediterranean environments. ICID 21st European Regional Conference, Topic 4, Frankfurt (Oder), Germany and Slubice, Poland, 15–19 May 2005, CD ROMGoogle Scholar
  25. Rossi G (2003) An integrated approach to drought mitigation in Mediterranean regions. In: Rossi G et al (eds) Tools for drought mitigation in Mediterranean regions. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 3–18Google Scholar
  26. Smith M (1992) CROPWAT: acomputer program for irrigation planning and management. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 46, FAO, Rome, 126 ppGoogle Scholar
  27. Schwartz P, Randall D (2003) An abrupt climate change scenario and its implications for United States National Security, Environmental Defense Fund, New York, 22 pp. Cited 27 September 2008
  28. Surfer 8 (2002) Surfer 8 Program, Surface mapping system, Golden Software, Golden, CO, USA. Cited 27 September 2008
  29. Wilhite DA (2000) Drought as a natural hazard: concepts and definitions. In: Wilhite DA (ed) Drought: a global assessment. Routledge, London, pp 3–18Google Scholar
  30. Wilhite DA, Glantz MH (1985) Understanding the drought phenomenon: the role of definitions. Water Int 10:111–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cr. Paltineanu
    • 1
    Email author
  • I. F. Mihailescu
    • 2
  • Zoia Prefac
    • 2
  • Carmen Dragota
    • 3
  • Felicia Vasenciuc
    • 4
  • Nicola Claudia
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Institute for Fruit Growing, Pitesti-MaracineniArges districtRomania
  2. 2.Ovidius University, Faculty of GeographyConstantaRomania
  3. 3.Institute of Geography of the Romanian AcademyBucharestRomania
  4. 4.National Meteorological AdministrationBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations