Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
DOI 10.1007/s11027-013-9464-0
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Abstract Though most factors that trigger droughts cannot be prevented, accurate, relevant
and timely forecasts can be used to mitigate their impacts. Drought forecasts must define the
droughts severity, onset, cessation, duration and spatial distribution. Given the high probability of droughts occurrence in Kenya, her heavy reliance on rain-fed agriculture and lack of
effective drought mitigation strategies, the country is highly vulnerable to impacts of
droughts. Current drought forecasting approaches used in Kenya are not able to provide
short and long term forecasts and they fall short of providing the severity of the drought. In
this paper, a combination of Artificial Neural Networks and Effective Drought Index is
presented as a potential candidate for addressing these drawbacks. This is demonstrated
using forecasting models that were built using weather data for thirty years for four weather
stations (representing 3 agro-ecological zones) in Kenya. Experiments varying various
input/output combinations were carried out and drought forecasting network models were
implemented in Matrix Laboratorys (MATLAB) Neural Network Toolbox. The models
incorporate forecasted rainfall values in order to mitigate for unexpected extreme climate
variations. With accuracies as high as 98 %, the solution is a great enhancement to the
solutions currently in use in Kenya.
Keywords Drought Forecasts . Artificial Neural Networks(ANNs) . Effective Drought
Index(EDI) . Available Water Resource Index(AWRI) . Rainfall Variations . Kenya
1 Introduction
Droughts are among the most expensive disasters in the world and their negative impacts
span economic, social and environmental aspects of the affected society. It is for this reason
M. Masinde (*)
Department of Information Technology, Central University of Technology, Private Bag X20539,
Bloemfontein, 9300, South Africa
e-mail: emasinde@cut.ac.za
M. Masinde
e-mail: muthonimasinde@yahoo.com
URL: http://www.muthonimasinde.net
that research on drought has attracted a lot of interests from environmentalists, ecologists,
hydrologists, meteorologists, geologists, economists and agricultural scientists (Mishra and
Desai 2006). In Byun and Wilhite (1999), literature on droughts is classified under 4
categories; (1) causes of droughts (atmospheric science); (2) frequency and severity of
droughts in a given region; (3) impacts of droughts; and (4) response, mitigation and
preparedness for droughts; this paper focuses on some aspects of the latter. Natural disasters
triggered by critical climate extremes especially droughts continue to affect millions of
people in Africa. According to the World Disasters Report of 2011, Africa contributed over
50 % of the droughts that occurred in the world between 2001 and 2011 (Armstrong et al.
2011).
Kenya has consistently contributed the highest number of people affected by natural
disasters in the Continent (Deely et al. 2010). Droughts are heavily felt in Kenya because of
three factors: (1) regularity droughts are so regular in Kenya; they were for instance
experienced in 50 % of the years between 1980 and 2008; (2) like most other developing
countries of Africa, Kenyas rain-fed agriculture is the backbone of the economy. Over 80 %
of Kenyans rely on the agricultural sector that contributes 24 % of the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) (Mwagore 2002). The sector is highly sensitive to droughts; and (3) inability
of Kenyas population to prepare and adapt to droughts. Being a developing country with
46 % of the rural population living below the poverty line, the governments priority list is
filled with items such as providing basic education, implementing democratic constitution,
peace initiatives, providing basic healthcare, and so on. This leaves no room for developing
drought mitigation strategies. Two examples of recent droughts that affected Kenya include:
the 19992002 drought in western and central Kenya that affected 23 million people (WHO
Collaborating Centre for Research on the Epidemiology of Disasters (CRED) 2012) and the
20052006 in the northern and eastern regions of Kenya that left over 70 % of the livestock
dead (CERF 2009).
Droughts are quantified using indices such as the Effective Drought Index (EDI). EDI is able
to quantify droughts in absolute terms and also provide answers to: (1) the when, (2) the how
long (onset to cessation) as well as (3) the severity of droughts/floods (Byun and Wilhite 1999;
Mishra and Singn 2010 ). EDI quantifies droughts in terms of droughts classes composed of
positive and negative real values; for example, 2.50 indicates extreme drought, +3.28 indicates
extreme floods and 0.98 indicates close to normal wetness. EDI further qualifies droughts by
providing Available Water Resource Index (AWRI) that can for example reliably inform a
farmer of the amount of the available soil moisture at any given day.
Though the well-developed drought indices such as EDI perform very well in mapping
droughts in spatial and timescale dimensions, they only detect the events already happening
(Masinde and Bagula 2011). In this paper, Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs) play the role
of forecasting/predicting future droughts. The numerical approaches that are used in Kenya
produce forecasts with low accuracies; 70 % at best (Mutua 2011). With such forecasts, it
becomes difficult to make sound policy decisions to mitigate for droughts.
The work presented in this paper is part of a larger project whose main objective was to
develop an effective, sustainable and relevant home-grown Drought Early Warning System
(DEWS) for the Sub-Saharan Africa by making use of Artificial Intelligence technologies to
integrate: (1) indigenous knowledge on droughts; (2) scientific weather forecasts; (3)
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs); and (4) mobile phones (Masinde and Bagula 2012).
The main component of this DEWS is Drought Monitoring and Prediction. While the
evaluation of the strengths of EDI as a tool for monitoring droughts in terms of their severity,
onset, cessation and probability of their occurrence has been described by Masinde and
Bagula (2012), this paper tackles the Drought Prediction sub-component of DEWS. It
KMD uses statistical and dynamical models to generate seasonal rainfall forecasts for
each region in Kenya; these are then compared against the forecasts from neighbouring
countries, as well as against the forecasts from several global dynamical models, issued by
Meteorological agencies in Europe and the United States. These are then compiled to give
probabilistic forecast of rainfall under three categories: above-, near- or below-normal
rainfall. One of the shortcomings of KMDs approach is the fact that their forecasts provide
conceptual indications of droughts/floods without giving operational indicators. This makes
it difficult for key stakeholders to develop solid strategic plans. Conversely, Effective
Drought Index (EDI) is able to quantify droughts in absolute terms and also provide answers
to: (1) the when, (2) the how long (onset to termination) as well as (3) the severity of
droughts/floods. Combining EDI with Artificial Neural Networks(ANNs) leads to a more
effective drought forecasting solution described in this paper.
reflect daily/weekly patterns. Researchers such as Byun and Wilhite (1999) developed the
EDI to address SPI shortcomings.
EDI is different from the rest of the indices in a number of ways; it was developed to
address weaknesses identified in the existing (at the time) drought indices. Some desirable
features of EDI are: (1) More accurately calculates current level of available water resources;
(2) It considers drought continuity, not just for a limited period; it can therefore diagnose
prolonged droughts that continue for several years; (3) It is computed using precipitation
alone; and (4) It considers daily water accumulation with a weighting function for time
passage. Calculation is therefore made with consideration of the fact that the quantity of
rainfall that can be used as a water resource drops gradually over time after the rain has
fallen. Effective Precipitations (EPs) are used to compute deficiency or surplus of water
resources for a particular date and place. EP here refers to the summed value of daily
precipitation with a time-dependant reduction function; it makes use of Eq. 1 below.
EPi
Xi
n1
Pn
m1 Pm
1
where Pm is the precipitation of m days before and the index i represents the duration of
summation (DS) in days. Here i=365 is used, that is, summation for a year which is the most
dominant precipitation cycle worldwide. The 365 can then be a representative value of the
total water resources available or stored for a long time.
For instance, if i=2, then m varies from 1 to 2, EP2 becomes [P1+P1+P2)/2]. Once the
daily EP is computed, a series of indices can be calculated to highlight different characteristics of a stations water resources. These are: Mean Effective Precipitation (MEP),
Deviation of EP (DEP) and standardised value of DEP (EDI). EDI produced satisfactory
results in measuring drought severity and was adopted (and adapted) to analyse 200-year
drought climatology of Seoul, Korea (Kim et al. 2009) and to analyse droughts in Kenya
(Masinde and Bagula 2011)
ANNs performance evaluation criteria: how will the performance of the model be
judged? The relevant criterion for this study was accuracy of predicted results. This
also happens to be the most commonly used criterion (Demuth et al. 2009).
(b) Data set division criteria; deals with how to share the available dataset among the
training, validation and testing phases of ANNs. Most neural network tools such as
MATLAB Neural Network Toolkit adopt 70:15:15 percentages for training, validation
and testing respectively (Demuth et al. 2009). This data set division criterion was
adopted in this paper.
(c) Data pre-processing with the aim of ensuring some form of standardisation. In this
paper, all rainfall data was first subjected to EDI computation and hence, it was already
standardised/homogenisation. Further, the mapminmax function implemented in the
MATLAB Neural Network Toolkit was applied. The latter puts all the input values into
[1:1] range. This in turn ensured that all variables involved had equal representation
during the training.
(d) Determining model input, this is purely based on a priori knowledge of causal variables in conjunction with inspections of time series plots of potential inputs and
outputs. In this paper an array of weather parameters such as daily readings of
temperature, rainfall, relative humidity and wind direction were considered. From the
rainfall values, both daily and monthly EDI and AWRI were computed and extensively
used as inputs/outputs of the neural networks.
(e) Selecting a suitable network architecture which is made up of two aspects:
The type of connection (are there loops?) among the nodes; and how many hidden layers
and how many nodes in each of the hidden layers. The number at the input and output layers
is generally determined by the problem domain; this is referred to as the geometry of the
network.
Pilot Single-CaseStudy
Eploratory MultipleCase-Studies
Confirmatory SingleCase-Study
daily precipitation data for years 1979 to 2009 from these stations was used; this translated
into 436531 records (Table 1).
5.3 EDI calculation
Two Phases: (1) Data cleaning; (2) Data analysis; were carried out as per the flow chart
shown in Fig. 2. A Java program was written to covert the original format to formats
acceptable by the EDI Fortan program: A Fortan program developed by Byun and Wilhite
(1999) and available at (http://atmos.pknu.ac.kr/~intra2/down_src.php (lastly accessed on 10
October 2012) was then used to compute EDI values. This computer program uses Eq. 1
Dagoretti
Embu
Kakamega
Makindu
WMO number
63741
63720
63687
63766
ICAO
HKNC
HKEM
HKKG
HKMU
Year opened
1954
1975
1957
1904
Latitude
01 18S
00 30S
00 17 N
2 17S
Longitude
36 45E
37 27E
34 47E
37 50E
Elevation
1,798 m
1,493 m
2,133 m
1,000 m
1,023,mm
1,250 mm
1,913 mm
593 mm
Ecological-zone
Geographical region
11
Highland (Nairobi)
11
Central
13
Western
10
Coast
Weather Data
in text files;
Source: KMD
Extract
rainfall data
for 4 stations
Formatted Data
EDI
Program
Computed
Monthly &
Daily EDI
Excel Charts
Generator
EDI Web-Based
Decision Support
Database
System
(MySQL)
(presented in Section 3) to compute daily/monthly EDIs and outputs them into text files. The
raw data that was acquired from the Kenya KMD was first cleaned and formatted to suit the
pre-defined format (generating an input file to the EDI program) for each of the 4 weather
stations. For each input file, an output file containing the EDI and AWRI values was
generated. These were then exported and stored in a My Structured Query Language
(MySQL) database from where various data analysis reports were generated. Some of these
can be found in (Masinde and Bagula 2011).
Date
Total Precipitation
AWRI
EDI
1980-01-01
0.0
117.0
0.66
1981-01-31
0.0
208.1
0.96
2009-12-31
26.6
146.7
0.20
&
&
&
A simple Java program was then created to convert input files in the format on Table 2 to
the following inputs-targets mapping.
(i)
&
(ii)
Network 8: En+1 =f(En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5):Given EDI values for the last 6 days, forecast the EDI value for the next day.
Heterogeneous inputs, homogeneous output example:
&
(iii)
Network 14: En+1 =f((Pn, Pn1, Pn2, Pn3, Pn4, Pn5 ) (En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5)
(Wn, Wn1, Wn2, Wn3, Wn4, En5)):Given Precipitation, EDI and AWRI values for the last 6 days, forecast the EDI
value for the next day.
Homogeneous inputs, heterogeneous output example:
&
(iv)
Network 2: En+1,Wn+1 =f(En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5):Given EDI values for the last 6 days, forecast the EDI and AWRI values for the
next day.
Heterogeneous inputs, heterogeneous output example:
&
Network7: En+1,Wn+1 =f((En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5) (Wn, Wn1, Wn2, Wn3,
Wn4, Wn5) ((Pn, Pn1, Pn2, Pn3, Pn4, Pn5)):Given EDI, AWRI and Precipitation values for the last 6 days, forecast the EDI
and AWRI values the next day.
Inputs (I)
Targets (T)
Tr
Vl
Ts
Regression (R)
Rn
Tr
Vl
Ts
Rn
2,340.90
2,358.28
2,358.05
0.58
0.68
0.62
Network2
1,169.10
1,365.17
1,287.50
0.94
0.94
0.95
Network3
41.24
40.19
47.63
0.76
0.77
0.75
Network4
795.01
861.62
885.25
0.96
0.96
0.96
Network5
43.00
32.74
42.15
0.97
0.98
0.97
Network6
Network7
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
39.45
35.66
51.13
59.27
50.33
45.75
6
1
0.76
0.97
0.76
0.97
0.74
0.97
4
1
0.84
0.82
0.85
0.36
0.32
0.32
Network9
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.99
0.99
0.99
Network10
0.38
0.35
0.38
0.78
0.78
0.78
Network11
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.99
1.00
0.99
Network12
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.99
0.99
0.99
Network13
Network14
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
0.31
0.02
0.31
0.02
0.33
0.02
5
1
0.82
0.99
0.82
0.99
0.82
0.99
5
1
4,672.09
4,847.33
4,743.63
0.50
0.50
0.46
Network16
2,447.19
2,566.56
2,669.63
0.78
0.77
0.77
Network17
87.57
77.81
80.48
0.99
0.99
0.99
Network18
1,655.01
1,834.05
1,703.69
0.85
0.85
0.85
Network19
84.57
91.60
72.05
0.99
0.99
0.99
Network20
Network21
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
Y
77.17
80.67
78.17
79.87
118.44
97.39
4
3
0.99
0.99
1.00
0.99
0.99
0.99
1
1
P precipitation, E Effective Drought Index, W Available Water Resource Index (AWRI), Tr Training, Vl
Validation, Ts Testing, Y yes (included in the input/targets), N No (not included in the inputs/targets), Rn Rank
(the Rank of the Network by performance (MSE and R), for example, Network7 has the lowest error in the
Category 1 while Network 14 and Network 19 have the lowest error in Category 2 and 3 respectively)
Though the ranking of the networks was based on the average of the performance (MSE and R) of the three
data sets (Tr, Vl and Ts); the value of V1 is preferred because it is the measure of the networks ability to carry
out the future forecasting (classify dataset it has not encountered before).
12 and 14), Network 9 had the lowest MSE (0.0179) as well as the strongest R(0.99068).
Similarly, in the category of networks that compute AWRI, Network 17 had the lowest
MSE(64.9521) and highest R (0.99412). While for Makindu, Network 9 performed better
among the networks with EDI as output but unlike the case of Embu and Dagoretti, Network
21(3 inputs) had the least MSE and Network 19(has EDI as the second input) had the highest
value of R. Since the improvements (51.4371 to 47.7839 (7 %) for MSE and 0.99307 to
0.99361(0.05 %)) were too low considering that extra input(s) values are needed, Network
17 was selected to represent this category.
Networks 5 and 7 have both EDI and AWRI as output and therefore difficult to calculate
the implications of MSE. Besides, these networks had weaker Regression values for all the
Regression
Tr
Vl
Ts
Average
Tr
Vl
Ts
Average
Network5
34.4754
27.7476
38.8559
33.6930
0.98315
0.98450
0.98408
0.98391
Network7
35.1539
35.1539
33.3021
34.5366
0.97997
0.99816
0.98864
0.98892
Network9
0.0188
0.0178
0.0200
0.01887
0.99018
0.99068
0.99001
0.99029
Network11
0.0165
0.0254
0.0149
0.01899
0.99126
0.98751
0.99211
0.99029
Network12
0.0166
0.0199
0.0221
0.0195
0.99138
0.98955
0.98865
0.98986
Network14
0.0174
0.0151
0.0240
0.0188
0.99110
0.99159
0.98793
0.99021
Network17
Network19
68.5308
68.4546
59.6619
81.1977
72.7853
53.5809
66.9927
67.7444
0.99378
0.99373
0.99442
0.99271
0.99334
0.99503
0.99385
0.99382
Network20
64.7377
75.1657
78.6352
72.8462
0.99399
0.99311
0.99332
0.99347
Network21
68.8056
75.3141
60.2966
68.1388
0.99382
0.99237
0.99457
0.99359
weather stations and were therefore not considered in building the final prediction models.
Further, including extra inputs to calculate either EDI or AWRI values did not have
significant improvements on the Networks performance, as such; only the two single-input
Networks (Network 9 for EDI and Network 17 for AWRI) were considered in the next
phases. With MSE values ranging from 3 % to 7 % on EDI, Network 9 generated values that
are within acceptable error-range. For example, an EDI value 4.32 (Extreme Floods) with an
error of 3 % will yield 4.320.13. Similarly, Network 17 has MSE values between 4 % and
8 % and an AWRI value of 194.6 would yield 194.6 8.1
6.4 Exploratory phase II - Forecast models results
Using the results above, neural networks were created to forecast future values of EDI
(Network 9) and AWRI (Network 17) for the short-term, medium-term and long-term timescales as follows:
6.4.1 Short-Term forecasts
(a)
D-Days-Lead-Time Forecast
The lead-time (in days) considered included: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12 and 14. Given a specific
day n, to forecast EDI or AWRI value for d-days from n, the following expression was used:
Forecast[En+d]=f(En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5) where En is the EDI value for day n;
the latter ranges from 1 to 6. That is, in order to forecast future values, 6 past values are input
into the neural network. In case of AWRI, E is replaced with W. For example to forecast the
value of EDI 5-days Lead-Time from 21st January (26th January), the following expression
applies:
ForecastE215 f E21 ; E20 ; E19 ; E18 ; E17 ; E16
For the purpose of training and testing the neural networks, the daily EDI/AWRI values
for years 1980 to 2009 were used. For each of the 3 weather stations, input files for each of
the neural networks (representing forecast durations above) were created. In all the networks
except 12b and 14b, 6 number of values (EDI or AWRI) were included as inputs to the
neural network models. In an attempt to find out if increasing the number of inputs would
significantly improve the network performance, the number of inputs were increased to 12
and 14 in 12b and 14b respectively. The results of this network model are shown in Figs. 5
and 6; the results indicate that the performance of the network declines as the number of days
being forecast increases; for instance, forecasting 3 days ahead gives a better performance
that forecasting 14 days head.
Increasing the number of inputs (previous days values) did not have a significant
improvement in network performance. For example, increasing number inputs from 6 to
14 resulted in an increase from 13.61 to 13.55 %, 15.21 to 15.29 % and 9.256.52 % for
Dagoretti, Embu and Makindu respectively.
(b)
In the era of climate change, extreme climate variations may trigger precipitation either
during periods that it does not normally rain or lead to precipitation amounts that are below
or above the expected normal for the area/region. Conventionally, ANNs-based forecasting
solutions learn from past events/patterns and use this knowledge to forecast future trends.
This means that faced with extreme climate variations, ANNs-based drought forecast
solution would result in poor forecast skill. In order to take care of such events, the DDays-Lead-Time Forecasting neural networks described in (a) above were modified to
include forecasted precipitation values for the lead-time considered. Example, to forecast
the drought (EDI and AWRI) values for the 5-days-Lead-Time counting from 21st January
(26th January), the anticipated daily precipitation (as forecasted by professional weather
forecasting institutions such as the Kenya Meteorological Department) for the 5 days are
included as inputs to the networks:
ForecastE215 f E21 ; E20 ; E19 ; E18 ; E17 ; E16 ; P22 ; P23 ; P24 ; P25 ; P26
Where Pi represent the forecasted (approximated) precipitation values
As shown in Figs. 7 and 8, with accuracies of 94.13 to 97.03 %, 93.57 to 97.62 % and
96.25 to 99.09 % for Dagoretti, Embu and Makindu respectively, the networks in the EDI
category (Network 9) displayed excellent performance. Further, the networks had a
Fig. 5 MSE graph for D-Days-Lead-Time for selected weather stations in Kenya
Fig. 6 Regression graph for D-Days-Lead-Time for selected weather stations in Kenya
correlation coefficient values between 0.98 and 0.99. It must be noted that the impressive
performance of the D-Day-Lead-Time Forecast were achieved because the actual historical
precipitation values were used as input. The real networks are expected to use values
forecasted by meteorological institutions. These values have accuracies as low as 70 %
and therefore this will slightly affect the neural networks performance.
6.4.2 Medium and long term forecasts
Similar to the daily EDI, monthly EDI/AWRI values are computed using monthly precipitation totals. This is the data that was used for the following long-term and short-term
forecasts.
Fig. 7 MSE graph for D-Days-Lead-Time (with precipitation) for selected weather stations in Kenya
Fig. 8 Regression graph for D-Days-Lead-Time(with precipitation) for selected weather stations in Kenya
(a)
M-Months-Lead-Time Forecast
Six inputs (previous months) were selected as the standard input in training neural
networks to forecast monthly EDI/AWRI values. The lead-time units considered were 2,
3,4, 5,6,7 and 12 months.
Forecast[En+m]=f(En, En1, En2, En3, En4, En5) where En is the EDI value for month
n; the latter ranges from 1 to 6.
For example to forecast the value of EDI 5-months Lead-Time from January 2012 (that is
forecast for July 2012), the following expression applies:
ForecastEJun2012 f EJan2012 ; EDec2011 ; ENov2011 ; EOct2011 ; ESep2011 ; EAug2011
As shown in Table 5, the performance of the neural networks decreases as the length of
the forecast duration increases. The error rates for majority of the networks are above 30 %
resulting in forecasts that with below 70 % accuracy.
(a)
YYears-Lead-Time Forecasting
Using the expression below, forecast for Y(1,2,3 and 4) years were developed and tested
for the 3 weather stations.
Network 9 : EMonthM;Year y1 f EMonthM;Year y5 ; EMonthM;Year y4 ; EMonthM;Year y3 ;
EMonthM;Year y2 ; EMonthM;Year y1 ; EMonthM;Year y ; PYear y5 ; PYear y4 ; PYear y3 ;
PYear y2 ; PYear y1 ; PYear y ; PYear Yy1
Network 17 : WMonthM; Year n1 f WMonthM;Year n5 ; WMonthM; Year n4 ;
WMonthM; Year n3 ; WMonthM; Year n2 ; WMonthM; Year n1 ; WMonthM; Year n ; PYear n5 ;
PYear n4 ; PYear n3 ; PYear n2 ; PYear n1 ; PYear n ; PYear n1
Illustration: to forecast EDI/AWRI values for August 1986, the neural network requires the
EDI/AWRI values for August 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 and 85. It also requires the annual precipitation
totals for these years as well as an approximate annual precipitation value for year 1986
MSE
RMSE
%RMSE
0.552
0.556
0.514
0.743
0.746
0.717
26.75
29.01
24.37
0.6868
0.6713
0.7432
0.750
0.758
0.625
0.866
0.871
0.791
31.17
33.86
28.59
0.5483
0.4733
0.6317
0.903
0.947
0.845
0.950
0.973
0.919
34.19
37.86
36.74
0.3288
0.3907
0.4862
0.893
0.658
0.715
0.945
0.811
0.846
34.00
31.55
31.97
0.6583
0.5045
0.6686
0.995
0.730
0.801
0.998
0.855
0.895
35.90
33.24
35.15
0.3551
0.4204
0.5255
0.862
0.997
0.868
0.928
0.999
0.932
33.42
38.84
37.60
0.3359
0.1837
0.2477
12
0.809
1.087
1.009
0.900
1.043
1.004
27.15
34.93
36.27
0.3970
0.2593
0.4995
LT(D) Lead-Time in Days; D Dagoretti Station; E Embu station; M Makindu station; MSE Mean Square Error;
RMSE Root Mean Square Error computed by calculating the square root of the MSE; %RMSE Percentage
Root Mean Square Error calculated by computing the percentage of the actual mean values (EDI or AWRI)
the RMSE represents
Values 2, 3. ,12 represent the lead-time of the forecast in months. For example, entry 5 implies that the
forecast is for the 5th month given the previous 6 months. For example, given the values for June, July,
August, September, October and November 2011, the network forecasts the value for May 2012
To forecast EDI values for January 1998, the neural network requires the EDI values for
January 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 96. It also requires the annual precipitation totals for these
years as well as an approximate annual precipitation value for year 1997 and 1998. Values
for other calendar months are computed in a similar version. That is, given 6 EDI and
precipitation values for 6 years and predicted precipitation values for the lead period (1997
and 1998), the ANNs model for 2-years lead-time outputs the EDI values (Fi) for 1998. The
accuracy of this value (Fi) was determined by its closeness to the actual drought value (Ai)
for this period (1998). Figure 9 is a sample plot of such relationships as generated by the
ANNs model for 2-years lead-time for the period October 1997 to September 1999 using
data for Makindu weather station.
MSE was then used to determine the accuracy of the forecasts. The best performance
was retrieved from the MATLAB Artificial Neural Network Toolkit as illustrated in Fig. 10.
In the case of 2-Years lead-time EDI forecast model for Makindu, the best performance
(MSE=0.37097) was attained after 16 epochs; epoch here refers to the presentation of the
entire training set to the neural network.
Throughout the experiments, validation error was used o evaluate the performance of our
network models. For instance, the data for Makindu for Y-Years Lead Time category (see
Table 6) had MSE values of 0.205, 0.233, 0.267 and 0.270 for 1, 2, 3 and 4 years lead times
respectively. The AWRI models for Makindu for the same network category gave values
ranging from 3,037 to 4,661. In order to put the MSE values into perspective, further he
Percentage RMSE which was easier to understand than the MSE were computerd. A value of
2.89 % implied that the network had an accuracy of 97.11 %. This analysis was performed
for all models and networks with accuracies of over 70 % were considered acceptable.
Networks with correlation values of 0.9 and above were considered acceptable.
7.2 Conclusion
Most of the drought indices applied in forecasting droughts in Kenya fall short of providing
the severity of the drought. In addressing this drawback, a combination of ANNs and EDI
was adopted. This was evaluated by developing forecasting models for time-scales ranging
from one day to four years. The models were then tested using weather data for over 30 years
for 4 weather stations in Kenya. By including forecasted precipitation values as inputs to the
ANNs models, our solution took care of the effects of unprecedented climate variations. It
also exploited the correlation among EDI values of calendar months to forecast annual
droughts. With accuracies raging from 75 % to 98 %, the solution is a great enhancement to
the solutions currently in use in Kenya. In developing the ANNs models, three phases were
followed:
Phase I: - using 30-years (19792009) data for Embu Station, 21 neural networks were
created using different combinations of Rainfall (Precipitation), EDI and AWRI values.
From these, 10 best performing networks were selected for further investigation during the
Phase II.
Phase II: - Data for three weather stations (Dagoretti, Embu and Makindu) for 30 (1979
2009) years was used to further evaluate the 10 networks selected above. After thorough
analysis, 2 networks (for forecasting EDI and AWRI respectively) were identified and used
to run the following forecasts: (1) Next-Day-Forecast; (2) D-Days-Lead-Time Forecast; (3)
D-Days-Lead-Time With Precipitation Forecast; (4) Next-Month Forecast; (5) M-MonthsLead-Time Forecast (6) Next-Year Forecast; and (7) Y-Years-Lead-Time Forecast. Overall,
the D-Days-Lead-Time With Precipitation Forecast (for up to 7 days Lead-Time) had
accuracies levels of over 94 % while the Y-Years-Lead-Time Forecast (for up to 4 years
Lead-Time) had over 75 % accuracies. The Next-Month Forecast had poorer performance;
Dagoretti and Embu had accuracies of between 7687 % and 72 %80 % for EDI and AWRI
network categories respectively. However, monthly forecasts could still be achieved using
Table 6 Network Performance for the Y-Years-Lead-Time Forecast Network 9
MSE
RMSE
%RMSE
0.224
0.218
0.205
0.473
0.467
0.453
17.03
18.17
11.81
0.8521
0.8761
0.8516
0.305
0.305
0.233
0.552
0.552
0.482
19.87
21.47
13.02
0.8389
0.8618
0.9107
0.294
0.294
0.267
0.542
0.542
0.516
19.51
21.10
14.46
0.7953
0.8504
0.8682
0.285
0.315
0.270
0.533
0.561
0.520
19.20
21.83
14.60
0.8487
0.8167
0.8527
the Y-Years-Lead-Time Forecast. ANNs are known to rely on historical trends to forecast
future values but in the case of droughts, phenomena such as climate change may lead to
erroneous forecasts due to unexpected increase/decrease of precipitation. In this paper, the
ANNs forecasting models have addressed this by incorporating forecasted precipitation
values from issued at professional meteorological institutions such as the KMD. The fact
that the latter forecasts can have accuracies of as low as 70 % has been factored in to the
design and was found that it does not significantly affect accuracies of the ANNs outputs.
Phase III : this is the validation of the results achieved above; data set from Kakamega
weather station (not used before in the previous two phases) was utilised. The resulting
accuracies were similar to those achieved in Phase II.
The work presented in this paper is a part of an on-going research and one of the
immediate tasks is to put the ANNs models described here on to a web-based interface to
allow end users (such the meteorologists and staff at meteorological departments) to access
and use the system. This way, it will be possible to use the ANNs models together with the
seasonal climate forecasts carried out in Kenya and beyond.
Acknowledgement Special thanks to the Kenya Meteorological Department for providing the data set used
in this research.
References
Antoni O, Josip K, Antun M, Dragan B (2001) Ecol Model 138:255263
Armstrong S, Mark C, Randolph K, Dan M (2011) World Disasters Report Focus on Hunger and
Malnutrition. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. International Federation
of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva
ASCE Task Committee On Application Of Artificial Neural Networks In Hydrology (2000) Artificial Neural
Networks in Hydrology: II. Hydrologic Applications. J Hydrol Eng 5:115123
Bodri L, Cermak V (2001) Prediction of extreme precipitation using a neural network: application to summer
flood occurrence in Moravia. Journal of Environmental Informatics 45:155167
Byun H, Wilhite DA (1999) Objective quantification of drought severity and duration. J Clim 12:27472756
CERF (Central Emergency Response Fund) (2009) CERF funds jump start emergency aid operations in
Kenya. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Chang-Shian C, Boris P, Chen F, Chou N, Chao-Chung Y (2010) Development and application of a decision
group Back-Propagation Neural Network for flood forecasting. J Hydrol 385:173182
Collins A, Nick M, Michele M, Anne M, Maarten VA (2009) World Disasters Report Focus on
Early Warning, Action, 1st edn. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies,
Geneva
Deely S, David D, Jorgelina H, Cassidy J (2010) World Disasters Report Focus on Urban Risk, 1st edn.
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva
Demuth, H., Mark, B. and Martin, H. 2009. MATLAB Neural Network Toolbox Users Guide. 6
Dracup JA, KS L, KS L, Paulson EG Jr (1980) On the definition of droughts. Water Resour Res 16:289296
Elsa E, Moreira C, Coelho A, Paulo AA (2008) SPI-Based Drought Category Predication Using Loglinear
Models. J Hydrol 354:116130
Freitas, M.A.S. and Billib, M.H.A. 1997. Drought prediction and characteristic analysis in semiarid Cear,
northeast Brazil. Sustainability of Water Resources under Increasing Uncertainty, Anonymous IAHS, No.
240, , 105.
Huschke, R. E., 1970: Glossary of Meteorology. Amer. Meteor. Soc., 638 pp.
Kim D, Hi-Ryong B, Ki-Seon C (2009) Evaluation, modification, and application of the Effective Drought
Index to 200-Year drought climatology of Seoul, Korea. J Hydrol 378:112
Kung H, Hua J, Chen C (2006) Drought forecast model and framework using wireless sensor networks. J Inf
Sci Eng 22:751769
Maier HR, Dandy GC (2000) Neural networks for the prediction and forecasting of water resources variables:
a review of modelling issues and applications. Environ Model Softw 15(1):101124