The Standardized Precipitation Index (SPI), a well‐reviewed meteorological drought index recommended by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and its more recent climatic water balance variant, the Standardized Precipitation‐Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI), both rely on selection of a univariate probability distribution to normalize the index, allowing for comparisons across climates. Choice of an improper probability distribution may impart bias to the index values, exaggerating or minimizing drought severity. This study compares a suite of candidate probability distributions for use inSPIandSPEInormalization using the 0.5° × 0.5° gridded Watch Forcing Dataset (WFD) at the continental scale, focusing on Europe. Several modifications to theSPIandSPEImethodology are proposed, as well as an updated procedure for evaluatingSPI/SPEIgoodness of fit based on the Shapiro–Wilk test. Candidate distributions forSPIorganize into two groups based on their ability to model short‐term accumulation (1–2 months) or long‐term accumulation (>3 months). The two‐parameter gamma distribution is recommended for general use when calculatingSPIacross all accumulation periods and regions within Europe, in agreement with previous studies. The generalized extreme value distribution is recommended when computing theSPEI, in disagreement with previous recommendations.

Drought is a natural hazard that can cause a wide range of impacts affecting the environment, society, and the economy. Providing an impact assessment and reducing vulnerability to these impacts for regions beyond the local scale, spanning political and sectoral boundaries, requires systematic and detailed data regarding impacts. This study presents an assessment of the diversity of drought impacts across Europe based on the European Drought Impact report Inventory (EDII), a unique research database that has collected close to 5000 impact reports from 33 European countries. The reported drought impacts were classified into major impact categories, each of which had a number of subtypes. The distribution of these categories and types was then analyzed over time, by country, across Europe and for particular drought events. The results show that impacts on agriculture and public water supply dominate the collection of drought impact reports for most countries and for all major drought events since the 1970s, while the number and relative fractions of reported impacts in other sectors can vary regionally and from event to event. The analysis also shows that reported impacts have increased over time as more media and website information has become available and environmental awareness has increased. Even though the distribution of impact categories is relatively consistent across Europe, the details of the reports show some differences. They confirm severe impacts in southern regions (particularly on agriculture and public water supply) and sector-specific impacts in central and northern regions (e.g., on forestry or energy production). The protocol developed thus enabled a new and more comprehensive view on drought impacts across Europe. Related studies have already developed statistical techniques to evaluate the link between drought indices and the categorized impacts using EDII data. The EDII is a living database and is a promising source for further research on drought impacts, vulnerabilities, and risks across Europe. A key result is the extensive variety of impacts found across Europe and its documentation. This insight can therefore inform drought policy planning at national to international levels.

The summer drought of 2015 affected a large portion of continental Europe and was one of the most severe droughts in the region since summer 2003. The summer of 2015 was characterized by exceptionally high temperatures in many parts of central and eastern Europe, with daily maximum temperatures 2 °C higher than the seasonal mean (1971–2000) over most of western Europe, and more than 3 °C higher in the east. It was the hottest and climatologically driest summer over the 1950–2015 study period for an area stretching from the eastern Czech Republic to Ukraine. For Europe, as a whole, it is among the six hottest and driest summers since 1950. High evapotranspiration rates combined with a lack of precipitation affected soil moisture and vegetation and led to record low river flows in several major rivers, even beyond the drought-hit region. The 2015 drought developed rather rapidly over the Iberian Peninsula, France, southern Benelux and central Germany in May and reached peak intensity and spatial extent by August, affecting especially the eastern part of Europe. Over the summer period, there were four heat wave episodes, all associated with persistent blocking events. Upper-level atmospheric circulation over Europe was characterized by positive 500 hPa geopotential height anomalies flanked by a large negative anomaly to the north and west (i.e., over the central North Atlantic Ocean extending to northern Fennoscandia) and another center of positive geopotential height anomalies over Greenland and northern Canada. Simultaneously, the summer sea surface temperatures (SSTs) were characterized by large negative anomalies in the central North Atlantic Ocean and large positive anomalies in the Mediterranean basin. Composite analysis shows that the western Mediterranean SST is strongly related to the occurrence of dry and hot summers over the last 66 years (especially over the eastern part of Europe). The lagged relationship between the Mediterranean SST and summer drought conditions established in this study can provide valuable skill for the prediction of drought conditions over Europe on interannual to decadal timescales.

Drought is one of the most costly natural hazards in Europe. Due to its complexity, drought risk, meant as the combination of the natural hazard and societal vulnerability, is difficult to define and challenging to detect and predict, as the impacts of drought are very diverse, covering the breadth of socioeconomic and environmental systems. Pan-European maps of drought risk could inform the elaboration of guidelines and policies to address its documented severity and impact across borders. This work tests the capability of commonly applied drought indices and vulnerability factors to predict annual drought impact occurrence for different sectors and macro regions in Europe and combines information on past drought impacts, drought indices, and vulnerability factors into estimates of drought risk at the pan-European scale. This hybrid approach bridges the gap between traditional vulnerability assessment and probabilistic impact prediction in a statistical modelling framework. Multivariable logistic regression was applied to predict the likelihood of impact occurrence on an annual basis for particular impact categories and European macro regions. The results indicate sector- and macro-region-specific sensitivities of drought indices, with the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) for a 12-month accumulation period as the overall best hazard predictor. Vulnerability factors have only limited ability to predict drought impacts as single predictors, with information about land use and water resources being the best vulnerability-based predictors. The application of the hybrid approach revealed strong regional and sector-specific differences in drought risk across Europe. The majority of the best predictor combinations rely on a combination of SPEI for shorter and longer accumulation periods, and a combination of information on land use and water resources. The added value of integrating regional vulnerability information with drought risk prediction could be proven. Thus, the study contributes to the overall understanding of drivers of drought impacts, appropriateness of drought indices selection for specific applications, and drought risk assessment.

In 2015 large parts of Europe were affected by drought. In this paper, we analyze the hydrological footprint (dynamic development over space and time) of the drought of 2015 in terms of both severity (magnitude) and spatial extent and compare it to the extreme drought of 2003. Analyses are based on a range of low flow and hydrological drought indices derived for about 800 streamflow records across Europe, collected in a community effort based on a common protocol. We compare the hydrological footprints of both events with the meteorological footprints, in order to learn from similarities and differences of both perspectives and to draw conclusions for drought management. The region affected by hydrological drought in 2015 differed somewhat from the drought of 2003, with its center located more towards eastern Europe. In terms of low flow magnitude, a region surrounding the Czech Republic was the most affected, with summer low flows that exhibited return intervals of 100 years and more. In terms of deficit volumes, the geographical center of the event was in southern Germany, where the drought lasted a particularly long time. A detailed spatial and temporal assessment of the 2015 event showed that the particular behavior in these regions was partly a result of diverging wetness preconditions in the studied catchments. Extreme droughts emerged where preconditions were particularly dry. In regions with wet preconditions, low flow events developed later and tended to be less severe. For both the 2003 and 2015 events, the onset of the hydrological drought was well correlated with the lowest flow recorded during the event (low flow magnitude), pointing towards a potential for early warning of the severity of streamflow drought. Time series of monthly drought indices (both streamflow- and climate-based indices) showed that meteorological and hydrological events developed differently in space and time, both in terms of extent and severity (magnitude). These results emphasize that drought is a hazard which leaves different footprints on the various components of the water cycle at different spatial and temporal scales. The difference in the dynamic development of meteorological and hydrological drought also implies that impacts on various water-use sectors and river ecology cannot be informed by climate indices alone. Thus, an assessment of drought impacts on water resources requires hydrological data in addition to drought indices based solely on climate data. The transboundary scale of the event also suggests that additional efforts need to be undertaken to make timely pan-European hydrological assessments more operational in the future.