water

Article
Trend Analysis of Streamflows in Relation to Precipitation: A
Case Study in Central Italy
Matteo Gentilucci 1, * , Sophie Ingrid Djouohou 1 , Maurizio Barbieri 2 , Younes Hamed 3,4
and Gilberto Pambianchi 1

1 School of Sciences and Technologies, Geology Division, University of Camerino, 62032 Camerino, Italy;
[email protected] (S.I.D.)
2 Department of Chemical Engineering Materials Environment (DICMA), Sapienza University of Rome,
00185 Rome, Italy
3 Laboratory for the Application of Materials to the Environment, Water and Energy (LAM3E),
Department of Earth Sciences, University of Gafsa, Gafsa 2112, Tunisia
4 Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Science and Research, University of Houston,
3507 Cullen Blvd, Room 312, Houston, TX 77204, USA
* Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-3474100295

Abstract: The monitoring of water resources is becoming increasingly important for humid temperate
climates in light of climate change, which shows a generalised increase in temperatures and a decrease
in precipitation, which is not generalised but relative to the area of interest. In this context, it is
interesting to understand what the climatic changes have been, in terms of precipitation and how they
have affected streamflows, by analysing them on a monthly basis. At the basin scale, interpolations
were carried out with geostatistical methods using GIS software, spatialising the areal distribution
of precipitation and obtaining an average value that can be correlated with water flows. As a pilot
project, this research analysed the Upper Potenza basin in relation to the flow rates of the Potenza
River over two reference periods, from 1964 to 1979 and from 2005 to 2020. The results show a
decreasing trend in streamflows within the studied basin, while the precipitation trend decreases for
the period 1964–1979 and increases for the period 2005–2020. Effective precipitation, in turn, shows a
rather pronounced decrease in the more recent 2005–2020 period, due to climate change influencing
the increase in temperature and consequently, the increase in evapotranspiration. In this context, it
Citation: Gentilucci, M.; Djouohou,
is significant to note that the Pearson correlation coefficient of streamflow to effective rainfall for
S.I.; Barbieri, M.; Hamed, Y.;
both periods is about 0.8, suggesting that the net of anthropogenic disturbances, streamflow and
Pambianchi, G. Trend Analysis of
actual precipitation maintain a high correlation. This model could be exported to other territories,
Streamflows in Relation to
Precipitation: A Case Study in in order to gain a global view for a better understanding and subsequent adaptation to ongoing
Central Italy. Water 2023, 15, 1586. climate change.
https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081586
Keywords: GIS; precipitation; flow rate; streamflow; interpolation; kriging; climate change
Academic Editor: David Post

Received: 17 March 2023

Revised: 14 April 2023
Accepted: 17 April 2023 1. Introduction
Published: 19 April 2023 1.1. State of the Art
Currently, not only scientists but also the general public is aware of the effects that
climate change may have on the hydrological cycle [1]. So much so that numerous interna-
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
tional researchers [2] have highlighted the effects of climate change and human impact on
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
seasonal and annual streamflows and the increase in the frequency and intensity of floods
This article is an open access article observed in recent decades [3–6]. These hydrological variations have so many negative
distributed under the terms and implications on water resources, hydrological risk assessment and related economic issues,
conditions of the Creative Commons that they have attracted the interest of scientists and the concern of people involved in
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// land planning and management [7]. For this reason, many studies have been conducted to
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ analyse the temporal variability of streamflows and their connections with climate change
4.0/). and general atmospheric circulation [8–12], or human activities involving the exploitation

Water 2023, 15, 1586. https://doi.org/10.3390/w15081586 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/water

Water 2023, 15, 1586 2 of 18

of water resources [13]. In this regard, Hannah et al. in 2011 [14] clearly emphasised the
crucial role of historical flow records and archives to conduct appropriate and reliable
analyses of hydrological variability in the recent past in order to develop predictive models
for the future [15]. In the scientific literature, the monthly streamflow variations of many
European rivers in the interval 1962–2004 have been analysed in this way; however, no
Italian river was analysed in this study [16]. On the other hand, extreme streamflow varia-
tions, taking into account emission scenarios, were analysed on the basis of the 1961–1990
standard period [17]. Here, precipitation and runoff models validated by the hydrological
data of several rivers were used, among which only one Italian river was considered, the
Po at the Pontelagoscuro discharge gauge (the most downstream and very close to the
mouth). In the most recent scientific literature [18], it is highlighted that river streamflows
in Europe increased especially in northern Europe in winter, while they decreased mainly
in the Mediterranean area. Additionally, according to this report, water deficits in rivers
were observed in the period 2071–2100 under two emission scenarios RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5
based on the period 1981–2010, and again a greater deficit was shown in the Mediterranean
area, while the same deficit was not shown in Central and Northern Europe [18]. Similarly,
studies have been carried out to assess the trend of river floods in the recent period, studies
have shown an alternation in Europe of increasing and decreasing floods according to
the different areas of location, highlighting that the most relevant changes due to climate
change are observed in smaller basins [19]. Climate change is a consolidated reality, largely
due to anthropogenic emissions into the atmosphere, which affects not only hydrology
but many other fields of research, such as agriculture [20,21], biodiversity [22,23], slope
stability [24,25], the vegetation [26,27] and the economy in general [28]. Climate change
can affect streamflow both through rising temperatures [29,30] which inevitably affect the
increase in evapotranspiration and through changes in the rainfall regime [31]. Significant
changes in mean temperatures and consequently in potential evapotranspiration have been
shown worldwide [32], and this study area is no exception. About mean precipitation, the
change is not as pronounced, although it is much more variable from an aerial point of
view, with increasing trends in some areas and decreasing trends in others [33,34]. While
long-term trends in the flow rates of rivers are certainly to be assessed through an analysis
of average climatic variables, in cases where maximum flow rates or flood events are to be
investigated, reference is made to extreme events [35]. Even in the case of extreme events,
there is a lengthy discussion in the literature, which has been growing in recent years, to
provide analysis and improve land management to defend against these events that often
become catastrophic. Sometimes extreme precipitation indices are used to correlate them
with the intensity and occurrence of floods [36,37], while in other cases extreme precipi-
tation data are used to identify rainfall IDF (intensity duration frequency) curves related
to rainfall return levels [38]. All this is aimed both at managing water resources at a time
when climate change seems to be pushing the planet towards a drying up, especially in
already vulnerable areas [39], and at-risk mitigation by allowing the drafting of data-driven
and elaborated strategies [40]. In this context, the present research is innovative because
it investigates a pilot project, a smaller water basin, thus the areas most sensitive to flow
changes generated by climate variations. In particular, the upstream part of a reservoir
was chosen where there was no particular increase in water extraction for irrigation or
industrial purposes. This has made it possible, in a completely innovative way compared to
current scientific literature, to assess the actual relationship between climatic variables and
streamflows by comparing two periods far apart in order to understand their similarities
and differences, free of uncertainties due to anthropic changes. This type of analysis could
highlight the actual dependence, without overestimating as might happen in other contexts
the effect of climate change on discharge.

1.2. Study Area

This study considers the upper part of the Potenza River basin (Figure 1), which has
an extension of 339.80 km2 . This basin includes approximately 11 municipalities on the
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 19

Water 2023, 15, 1586 1.2. Study Area 3 of 18

This study considers the upper part of the Potenza River basin (Figure 1), which has
an extension of 339.80 km2. This basin includes approximately 11 municipalities on the
Adriatic
Adriaticcoast
coastofofCentral
CentralItaly, with
Italy, thethe
with basin closing
basin nearnear
closing San San
Severino Marche
Severino (coordinates:
Marche (coordi-
13 ◦ 110 18.7” for longitude and 43◦ 130 46.2” for latitude).
nates: 13°11′18.7″ for longitude and 43°13′46.2″ for latitude).

Figure Geographyofofthe
Figure1.1.Geography thestudy
studyarea,
area,upper
upperpart
partofofPotenza
Potenzariver
riverbasin.
basin.

The
ThePotenza
Potenzaisisa river in the
a river province
in the of Macerata,
province in theinMarche
of Macerata, regionregion
the Marche of Italyof
(south
Italy
of Europe). The spring of the river is in the territory of Fiuminata (Figure 1).
(south of Europe). The spring of the river is in the territory of Fiuminata (Figure 1). TheThe Potenza
River consists
Potenza Riverofconsists
two mainof branches,
two main the westernthe
branches, onewestern
descending from Mountfrom
one descending Vermenone
Mount
1363
Vermenone 1363 m a.s.l. and the north-eastern one from Mount Pennino 1571 mjoin
m a.s.l. and the north-eastern one from Mount Pennino 1571 m a.s.l., which at
a.s.l.,
Poggio Sorifa,
which join a small Sorifa,
at Poggio village.aThe river
small flowsThe
village. east-west and into
river flows the Adriatic
east-west and into Seathe
at Porto
Adri-
Recanati town,
atic Sea at Portoafter a course
Recanati of about
town, after a95course
km. of about 95 km.

2. Materials and Methods

2. Materials and Methods
Hydrometric data, obtained at the hydrometric closure station located in San Severino
Hydrometric data, obtained at the hydrometric closure station located in San Sev-
Marche (Figure 1) and retrieved from 1964 to 1979 from the Italian Institute for Environ-
erino Marche (Figure 1) and retrieved from 1964 to 1979 from the Italian Institute for En-
mental Protection and Research (ISPRA) and from 2005 to 2020 from the Meteorological
vironmental Protection and Research (ISPRA) and from 2005 to 2020 from the Meteoro-
and Hydrological Information System service of the Marche Region, were required for this
logical and Hydrological Information System service of the Marche Region, were re-
analysis. These study periods were chosen because they represent the range of existence
quired for this analysis. These study periods were chosen because they represent the
of the hydrometric station, which was not active from 1980 to 2004. As far as climate
range of existence of the hydrometric station, which was not active from 1980 to 2004. As
data is concerned, instead, 16 weather stations were taken into consideration (Camerino,
far as climate data is concerned, instead, 16 weather stations were taken into considera-
Cingoli, Loreto, Lornano, Macerata, Montecassiano, Pioraco, Pollenza, Recanati OGSM,
tion (Camerino,
Recanati, Cingoli,
San Severino Loreto,
Marche Lornano,
OGSM, Macerata,
San Severino Montecassiano,
Marche, Pioraco, Pollenza,
Serralta, Serrapetrona, Sorti,
Tolentino), in order to prepare interpolations based on a good number of values to provide
accurate estimates for both study periods (1964–1979 and 2005–2020). All weather stations
considered were active during the two study periods with continuous data of precipitation
 Recanati OGSM, Recanati, San Severino Marche OGSM, San Severino Marche, Serralta,
Serrapetrona, Sorti, Tolentino), in order to prepare interpolations based on a good num-
Water 2023, 15, 1586 ber of values to provide accurate estimates for both study periods (1964–1979 4 of 18 and
2005–2020). All weather stations considered were active during the two study periods
with continuous data of precipitation and temperatures and were also prevalidated upon
byand
thetemperatures
institutionsand
managing
were alsothem. Subsequently,
prevalidated upon by the institutions
16 weathermanaging
stations them.
used were
Subsequently,
validated the 16 the
following weather
testsstations used by
prescribed were validated
the following
WMO (World the tests prescribed
Meteorological Organiza-
by the WMO (World Meteorological Organization) and homogenised
tion) and homogenised using the SNHT test [41,42]. (Figure 2). using the SNHT
test [41,42]. (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Map of weather stations.

Figure 2. Map of weather stations.
It was first checked using the land use map for 1990 and that for 2018, to verify as we
already knew that land use has not changed significantly in the study area. The Corine
It was first checked using the land use map for 1990 and that for 2018, to verify as we
Land Cover (CLC) is a land-use inventory that began in 1985 and which, by means of
already knew that land use has not changed significantly in the study area. The Corine
satellite tracking, has made it possible to keep track of changes over the years to the present
Land Cover
day. In (CLC)
this case, twoismaps
a land-use inventory
were compared, onethat began
relating in 1985
to CLC 1990and
and which, by means
one relating to of
satellite tracking, has made it possible to keep track of changes
CLC 2018, and the variation between land-use classes was also assessed graphically over over the years to the
present
the studyday. In In
area. this case, two
addition, maps were
the population in compared,
the study area onein relating
1971 and to CLCwas
in 2021 1990 and one
also
relating
counted,tousing
CLC 2018,
ISTAT and National
(Italian the variation between
Statistical Institute)land-use classes
data, in order was whether
to assess also assessed
the area canover
graphically indeed thebestudy
considered
area. to
In be free of significant
addition, disturbances
the population in thebetween 1964–1979
study area in 1971 and
and 2005–2020 that could influence the measured flow rates in one
in 2021 was also counted, using ISTAT (Italian National Statistical Institute) data,direction or another. Thein order
second step was to interpolate the rainfall, in order to obtain monthly and
to assess whether the area can indeed be considered to be free of significant disturbances annual averages
for both study periods, in the research area. The most suitable interpolative method was
Water 2023, 15, 1586 5 of 18

cokriging with altitude as the independent variable, since after a prior analysis of the
correlation between precipitation and altitude in the area, Pearson correlation coefficients
between 0.63 and 0.81 were found for both study periods, which were high enough to
guarantee excellent results. In this case, ordinary cokriging (OCK) (1) was used instead
of simple cokriging, as the assumption that the mean is known over the entire area being
interpolated, cannot be considered correct due to the non-pervasive coverage of the area,
because of the low number of weather stations present.

n (u) n (u)
ZOCK (u) = ∑α11=1 λOCK
α1 ( u ) Z1 ( uα1 ) + ∑α2 =1 λα2 ( u ) Z1 ( uα2 )
2 OCK
(1)

Z (u) = primary variable

λα = kriging weight for the α primary data sample

In order to be able to assess the goodness of an interpolative method, the cross-
validation procedure with the one-leave-out method was used, which resulted in four
statistical indices: mean standardized error (MSE), root mean square error standardized
(RMSSE), root mean square error (RMSE) and average standard error (ASE) [43].
Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) (2), is the standard deviation between observed and
predicted values. This parameter allows an assessment of the prediction errors for different
weather stations; however, RMSE is not an absolute parameter, since it is impossible to
compare different variables with the RMSE, but only the same dataset. The value of RMSE
should be the smallest possible and similar to the ASE (average standard error), in this way,
when it is predicting a value in a point without observation points it has only the ASE to
assess the uncertainty of the prediction:
s
2
∑in=1 [ Ẑ (si ) − z(si )]
RMSE = (2)
n

ẑ(si ) = estimated value

z(si ) = observed value

n = sample size
Average Standard Error (ASE) (3)–this statistical tool is known also as the standard
deviation from the mean and it is used to estimate the standard deviation of a sampling
distribution. The ASE is an estimator of the bias of the RMSE (i.e., the standard deviation
of the estimation error), a value close to zero and similar to RMSE represents a very low
error in the estimation of the variability of the sampling distribution:
r
∑in=1 σ̂2 (si )
ASE = (3)
n
Mean Standardized Error (MSE) (4) is similar to the mean error and calculates the
difference between measured and predicted values; however, the MSE values are not related
to single variables but can be used to compare different variables. The standardization
procedure leads a variable with mean x and variance σ2 , to another with mean zero and
variance equal to 1, in order to allow comparison between different variables. The mean
Water 2023, 15, 1586 6 of 18

standardized error is represented by the ratio between the mean absolute error and the
standard deviation of the estimation error:
ˆ
∑in=1 [ Ẑ (si ) − z(si )]/σ̂ (si )
MSE = (4)
n

σ̂(si ) = standard deviation

Root Mean Square Standardized Error (RMSSE) (5 allows the assessment of the efficacy
of prediction models, it is desirable to have a value close to 1. If the value of RMSSE is
lower than 1 the variability is overestimated, otherwise, it is underestimated; this is a
dimensionless statistical tool, independent from the considered variable and it is the most
significant instrument to evaluate the interpolative model with other variables:
s
2
∑in=1 [ Ẑ (si ) − z(si )/σ̂(si )]
RMSSE = (5)
n

The effective precipitation was then calculated by subtracting the potential evapo-
transpiration from the precipitation, estimated with Turc’s Equation (6) using the average
annual precipitation and the average annual temperature (7) for each study period [44].
 mm  P
ETp = q (6)
anno 0.9 + P2
L2

L = 300 + 25T + 0.05T 3 (7)

P = average annual precipitation

T = average annual temperature

In addition, the presence of a trend was tested for both effective precipitation and
evapotranspiration by means of the Mann–Kendall test (MK), with the slope calculated
through Sen’s slope estimator method. The Mann–Kendall (8) test makes no assumptions
about the underlying distribution of the data and its rank-based measure is not affected
by extreme value. Instead, Sen’s slope corresponds to the median of all calculated slopes
between each pair of points in the series. The Mann–Kendall test was used by setting an
alpha value of 0.05, i.e., with a 95% confidence level, thus the test is meaningful if the
p-value is less than 0.05, meaning that one can accept the alternative hypothesis H1 and
discard the null hypothesis H0 .
Then the MK rank statistic dk was given by:
n
dk = ∑ pi 2 ≤ k ≤ n (8)
i =1

Under the null hypothesis of no trend, the statistic dk is distributed as a normal

distribution with the expected value of E(dk) (9) and the variance var(dk ) (10) as follows:

k ( k − 1)
E[dk ] = (9)
4

k (k − 1)(2k + 5)
Var [dk ] = 2≤k≤n (10)
72
 Water 2023, 15, 1586 7 of 18

Under the above assumption, the definition of the statistic index Zk (11) is calculated as:

dk − E[dk ]
Zk = p k = 1, 2, 3, . . . . . . . . . ., n (11)
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW var [dk ] 7 of 19
Finally, through a scatterplot and Pearson’s correlation coefficient, the correlation and
linear trend were assessed for each of the two study periods.
3. Results
3. Results
3.1. Verification of Land Use Change
3.1. Verification of Land Use Change
Land use was tested by analysing the macro-categories of the CLC, both for the year
Land use was tested by analysing the macro-categories of the CLC, both for the year
1990 and for
1990 and for the year
the 2018,
year and
2018, asas
and can bebe
can seen, graphically
seen, there
graphically are
there nono
are major
majordifferences
differences
(Figure 3).
(Figure 3).

(a) (b)
Figure 3. 3.
Figure Corinne Land
Corinne Cover,
Land land
Cover, use
land map:
use (a)(a)
map: CLC 1990,
CLC (b)(b)
1990, CLC 2018.
CLC 2018.

InInorder
ordertotobe
be even more precise
even more preciseandandaccurate,
accurate,thethe land
land useuse percentages
percentages for both
for both maps
are given
maps below,
are given highlighting
below, that the
highlighting differences
that are absolutely
the differences minimalminimal
are absolutely and not significant
and not
for the purposes
significant of our research:
for the purposes 2.2% artificial
of our research: surfacessurfaces
2.2% artificial CLC 2018; CLC37.6%
2018; agricultural
37.6% ag-
areas CLC
ricultural 2018;
areas CLC60.2%
2018;Forest
60.2%and seminatural
Forest areas CLC
and seminatural areas 2018;
CLC1,6% 2018;artificial surfaces
1,6% artificial
CLC 1990;
surfaces CLC39.5%
1990;agricultural areas CLC
39.5% agricultural areas1990;
CLC and 58.9and
1990; Forest
58.9and seminatural
Forest areas CLC
and seminatural
1990.CLC
areas Finally,
1990.inFinally,
order toinexclude
order toany further
exclude anydisturbance to our analysis,
further disturbance to ourthe population
analysis, the
of the municipalities
population even partially
of the municipalities evenaffected
partiallybyaffected
the studyby area, i.e., the
the study upper
area, basin
i.e., the of the
upper
Potenza
basin of theRiver, was taken
Potenza River,into
wasaccount.
taken intoTheaccount.
inhabitants
The of all municipalities
inhabitants with a portion
of all municipalities
of territory in the study area, in 1971 and 2021, were counted. The
with a portion of territory in the study area, in 1971 and 2021, were counted. The result was that result
in 1971,
the population of the municipalities affected by the study area
was that in 1971, the population of the municipalities affected by the study area waswas 74,020 inhabitants,
while
74020 the population
inhabitants, whileupdated to 2021 updated
the population is 70,838to inhabitants,
2021 is 70838 so basically
inhabitants,there has been a
so basically
decrease
there in population
has been a decreasethat is basically on
in population thata par with theon
is basically higher
a parwater
with consumption
the higher water at the
present time.
consumption at the present time.

3.2. Interpolation of Precipitation

Watershed management requires data related to the very important issue of precip-
itation, often measured with rain gauges. The reliability of spatialization is determined
by the quality of the precipitation distribution within the study area, which derives pri-
marily from data quality control [45] and secondarily from interpolation. Several geosta-
tistical interpolation methods were tested for precipitation in the upper Potenza basin,
Water 2023, 15, 1586 8 of 18

3.2. Interpolation of Precipitation

Watershed management requires data related to the very important issue of precipita-
tion, often measured with rain gauges. The reliability of spatialization is determined by
the quality of the precipitation distribution within the study area, which derives primarily
from data quality control [45] and secondarily from interpolation. Several geostatistical
interpolation methods were tested for precipitation in the upper Potenza basin, but the
best, based on the cross-correlation results, obtained by the one-leave-out method, was
ordinary cokriging. Tables 1 and 2 show that all the statistical indices have values very
close to the optimum, zero for the MSE, one for the RMSSE and similar values between
RMSE and ASE.

Table 1. Cross-validation statistics for monthly precipitation in the upper Potenza River basin from
1964 to 1979, MSE: mean standardized error, RMSSE: root mean square error standardized, RMSE:
root mean square error, ASE: average standard error.

Month MSE RMSSE RMSE ASE

January −0.034 0.94 20.86 23.35
February −0.012 0.95 23.35 26.43
March −0.031 0.94 23.79 26.60
April −0.022 0.95 24.86 27.36
May −0.029 0.94 26.18 29.45
June −0.045 0.98 19.92 20.53
July −0.028 0.95 22.16 23.96
August −0.030 0.96 18.53 19.28
September −0.071 0.94 27.73 29.60
October −0.024 0.87 24.66 28.71
November −0.078 1.01 24.80 24.37
December −0.028 0.92 27.17 30.95

Table 2. Cross-validation statistics for monthly precipitation in the upper Potenza River basin from
2005 to 2020, MSE: mean standardized error, RMSSE: root mean square error standardized, RMSE:
root mean square error, ASE: average standard error.

Month MSE RMSSE RMSE ASE

January −0.012 0.89 20.06 23.26
February −0.051 0.93 26.21 29.45
March −0.061 0.97 35.18 41.35
April −0.054 0.94 30.27 35.16
May −0.042 0.90 25.07 29.46
June −0.029 1.02 31.03 34.77
July −0.006 1.09 30.12 29.84
August 0.003 0.94 23.11 24.86
September −0.071 1.02 35.61 34.81
October −0.021 0.99 29.76 33.30
November −0.045 0.96 29.23 33.93
December −0.054 1.00 35.62 38.21

The results of the interpolations are monthly average values over the upper basin of
the river Potenza (Table 3), which allows the analysis to continue until the actual rainfall
and river flows are correlated. It is evident from Table 3 there is a difference in terms
of average monthly precipitation over the basin, between the period 1964–1979 and the
period 2005–2020. In particular, the biggest differences in percentages are in the months of
September, October and August.
Taking the annual period into consideration, the rainfall analysis shows two different
trends, one decreasing for the period 1964–1979 and the other increasing for the period
2005–2020 (Figure 4). In each case, the Mann–Kendall test on the trend shows p-values that
do not allow the null hypothesis of no significant trend to be rejected. Interpolation was
 Water 2023, 15, 1586 9 of 18
Water
Water 2023,
2023, 15,
15, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 99 of
of 19
19

then performed for both periods, of which the experimental semivariogram is reported
(Figure 5). May 82.6 82.9
May 82.6 82.9
June 88.9 79.9
Table 3. Results of monthly precipitation interpolations averaged over the upper79.9
June 88.9 Potenza River basin.
July
July 72.9
72.9 49.1
49.1
August
Month
August 117.7
Prec. 1964–1979
117.7 72.5
Prec. 2005–2020
72.5
September
September
January 111.8
111.8
82.6 89.5
89.5
75.5
October
February
October 92.7
93.5
92.7 90.2
76.6
90.2
March
November 95.1
107.4 115.7
112.5
November 107.4 112.5
April
December 103.9
104.0 83.5
95.2
December
May 104.0
82.6 95.2
82.9
Annual
Annual
June
1158.6
1158.6
88.9
1133.9
1133.9
79.9
July 72.9 49.1
Taking
Taking the annual
annual period
August
the period into
into consideration,
117.7 the
consideration, the rainfall
rainfall analysis
analysis shows72.5 two
shows two differ-
differ-
ent trends, September
one decreasing for the period 111.8
1964–1979 and the other 89.5 for the pe-
increasing
ent trends, one decreasing for the period 1964–1979 and the other increasing for the pe-
riod October 92.7Mann–Kendall test on the90.2
riod 2005–2020
2005–2020 (Figure
(Figure 4).
November 4). In
In each
each case,
case, the
the
107.4Mann–Kendall test on the trend
trend shows
112.5 shows
p-values that do not
p-values thatDecember allow the null hypothesis
do not allow the null hypothesis of no significant trend to be rejected. In-
104.0of no significant trend to be 95.2rejected. In-
terpolation
terpolation was
was then
then performed
Annual performed forfor both
both periods,
1158.6 of
periods, of which
which the
the experimental1133.9semivario-
experimental semivario-
gram is reported (Figure
gram is reported (Figure 5).5).

1600 1600
1600 1600

1400 1400
1400 1400

1200 1200
(mm)

1200 1200
precipitation(mm)
(mm)
precipitation(mm)

1000 1000
1000 1000
precipitation
precipitation

800 800
800 800

600 600
600 600

400 400
400 400

200 200
200 200

0 0
0 0
1964 1969 1974 1979 2005 2010 2015 2020
1964 1969 1974 1979 2005 2010 2015 2020
Years
Years Years
Years
(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure 4. Annual
4. 4.
Annual average
average precipitation,
precipitation, in black
inin
black the
the trend
trend line:
line: (a) 1964–1979;
(a)(a)
1964–1979; (b) 2005–2020.
(b)(b)
2005–2020.
Figure Annual average precipitation, black the trend line: 1964–1979; 2005–2020.

(a)
(a) (b)
(b)
Figure
Figure
Figure 5. Semivariogram
5. 5. Semivariogram
Semivariogram of the
ofof
the annual
the annual
annual average
average
average precipitation: (a)
precipitation:
precipitation: 1964–1979;
(a)(a) (b)
1964–1979;
1964–1979; 2005–2020.
(b)(b) 2005–2020.
2005–2020. On the
OnOn
thethe
y-axis
y-axis there
there
y-axis thereis the
is is
the semi-variance,
semi-variance,
the while
while
semi-variance, the
the
while x-axis
x-axis
the shows
shows
x-axis showsthe
the distance
distance
the distance between
between
betweenpairs
pairs of observations.
ofof
pairs observations.
observations.

Analysing
Analysing
Analysing the
the average
the average
average annual
annual
annual rainfall
rainfall by
rainfall interpolating
byby interpolating
interpolating the values
the
the of
values
values the
ofof two
the
the two
two periods
periods
periods
shows
shows that there are some differences between the two periods, approximately 100 mm
shows that
thatthere
thereare some
are somedifferences
differencesbetween
between the
thetwo
twoperiods, approximately
periods, approximately 100
100
mm mm
less rainfall for the period 2005–2020, 1153 mm for the period 1964–1979 and 1023
less rainfall for the period 2005–2020, 1153 mm for the period 1964–1979 and 1023 mm forfor
less rainfall for the period 2005–2020, 1153 mm for the period 1964–1979 and mm
1023 mm for
the
the
the period
period 2005–2020
period 2005–2020
2005–2020 (Figure 6).
(Figure
(Figure 6).6).
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 19
Water 2023, 15, 1586 10 of 18

(a) (b)
Figure 6. A
Figure 6. verage
Averageannual precipitation:
annual (a)(a)
precipitation: 1964–1979; (b)(b)
1964–1979; 2005–2020.
2005–2020.

AA difference
difference mapmap was
was then
then made
made between
between thethe
twotwo rasters
rasters in in Figure
Figure 6 and
6 and a marked
a marked
decreaseininrainfall,
decrease rainfall,especially
especiallyin
in the
the mountainous
mountainous area,
area,emerged,
emerged,while
whileinin
thethe
less elevated
less ele-
zone,
vated therethere
zone, are also increases
are also in precipitation
increases overover
in precipitation the period 2005–2020
the period (Figure
2005–2020 7). 7).
(Figure

3.3. Evapotranspiration
Evapotranspiration plays a crucial role in the water balance and consequently also in
streamflows. In recent times, because of the increase in temperatures due to anthropogenic
global warming, the value of evapotranspiration tends to be an important variable, in
assessing the water supply to vegetation and also the hydrology of a given area. Turc’s
formula, similar to many other formulas that calculate evapotranspiration, has a strong
dependence on temperature, hence it was necessary to interpolate temperatures in the
study area for both study periods before calculating potential evapotranspiration. The
interpolation of the mean annual temperatures is shown here, which is very significant for
the assessment of climate change in the study area (Figure 8).
In particular, the analysis showed that the average temperature in the study area from
1964 to 1979 was 12.2 ◦ C, while from 2005 to 2020 it was 12.9 ◦ C, an increase of a remarkable
0.7 ◦ C. The correctness of the interpolation of the mean annual temperatures is evidenced
by the results of the cross-validation, which showed RMSSE values of 0.98 and 1.00 for the
period 1964–1979 and the period 2005–2020, respectively, MSE of −0.07 and −0.09, RMSE
of 0.58 and 0.57, and ASE of 0.62 and 0.59. The interpolative method used was always
cokriging with altitude as the independent variable, and in this case, we can see that the
relationship between the two variables is even stronger than in the case of precipitation.
In this research, Turc’s formula for potential evapotranspiration showed that the increase
in temperature between the two periods results in an increase in evapotranspiration of
544 mm for the period 1964–1979, and 559 mm for the period 2005–2020. As far as the trend,
there is no significant 95% trend for the period 1964–1979, while the trend is significant
for the period 2005–2020 with a Sen’s slope equal to 4.4 mm/year, which is so high that it
results in an increase in potential evapotranspiration of 70 mm (Figure 9).
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 19

Water 2023, 15, 1586 11 of 18

Figure 7. Variation in average annual precipitation between the periods 1964–1979 and 2005–2020.
Figure VariationTrend
3.4.7.Streamflow in average annualRainfall
and Effective precipitation
Trend between the periods 1964–1979 and 2005–2020.
From 1964 to 1979 the minimum streamflow recorded at the San Severino Marche
3.3. hydrometer
Evapotranspiration
station in the Potenza River was 3.757 m3 /s, and the maximum streamflow
was 12.166 m3 /s, while the
Evapotranspiration plays a crucial
mean averagerole in the water
streamflow of the balance
river wasand m3 /s (Figure also
consequently
7.594 9). in
The Mann–Kendall
streamflows. In recenttest for annual
times, streamflow
because shows a decreasing
of the increase trend, and
in temperatures dueSen’s slope
to anthropo-
test also indicates a decreasing trend in annual streamflow of magnitude − 0.046 m 3 /year
genic global warming, the value of evapotranspiration tends to be an important variable,
(Table 4). the water supply to vegetation and also the hydrology of a given area.
in assessing
Turc’s formula, similar to many other formulas that calculate evapotranspiration, has a
Table 4. Mann-Kendall and Sen’s slope test results for streamflow trend.
strong dependence on temperature, hence it was necessary to interpolate temperatures
in the study area for both study
Period periods
Kendall’s Tau before calculating
p-Value potential evapotranspiration.
Sen’s Slope
(m3 /Year)
The interpolation of the mean annual temperatures is shown here, which is very signifi-
1964–1979 − 0.092 0.620
cant for the assessment of climate change in the study area (Figure 8). − 0.051
2005–2020 −0.050 0.825 −0.078
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 19
Water 2023, 15, 1586 12 of 18

(a) (b)
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 19
Figure 8. Average
Figure annual
8. Average temperature:
annual (a)(a)1964–1979;
temperature: 1964–1979;(b)
(b)2005–2020.
2005–2020.

In particular, the analysis showed that the average temperature in the study area
590 from 1964 to 1979 was 12.2 °C, while from 5902005 to 2020 it was 12.9 °C, an increase of a
potential evapotranspiration (mm)
potential evapotranspiration (mm)

580 remarkable 0.7 °C. The correctness of the interpolation

580 of the mean annual temperatures
570
is evidenced by the results of the cross-validation,
570
which showed RMSSE values of 0.98
and 1.00 for the period 1964–1979 and the period 2005–2020, respectively, MSE of −0.07
560 560
and −0.09, RMSE of 0.58 and 0.57, and ASE of 0.62 and 0.59. The interpolative method
550 550
used was always cokriging with altitude as the independent variable, and in this case, we
540 can see that the relationship between the two 540 variables is even stronger than in the case of
precipitation. In this research, Turc’s formula for potential evapotranspiration showed
530 530
that the increase in temperature between the two periods results in an increase in evap-
520 520
otranspiration of 544 mm for the period 1964–1979, and 559 mm for the period 2005–2020.
510 510
As far as the trend, there is no significant 95% trend for the period 1964–1979, while the
500 trend is significant for the period 2005–2020 500 with a Sen’s slope equal to 4.4 mm/year,
1964 which
1969 is so high
1974 that it
1979 results in an increase in potential
2005 2010evapotranspiration
2015 of 70 mm
2020
(Figure 9).
Years Years

(a) (b)
Figure 9. Potential
Figure evapotranspiration
9. Potential and
evapotranspiration andtrend
trendline
lineininblack
blackcolour:
colour: (a)
(a) 1964–1979; (b)2005–2020.
1964–1979; (b) 2005–2020.

The period
3.4. Streamflow from
Trend and2005 to 2020
Effective an average value of 6.730 m3 /s. As can be seen
showsTrend
Rainfall
in Figure 10, there is a non-significant decreasing trend in the current streamflow. The
From 1964 to 1979 the minimum streamflow recorded at the San Severino Marche
magnitude of Sen’s slope is −0.082 m3 /year, which indicates a decreasing trend (Table 4).
hydrometer station in the Potenza River was 3.757 m /s, and the maximum streamflow
3

was 12.166 m3/s, while the mean average streamflow of the river was 7.594 m3/s (Figure
9). The Mann–Kendall test for annual streamflow shows a decreasing trend, and Sen’s
slope test also indicates a decreasing trend in annual streamflow of magnitude −0.046
m3/year (Table 4).
The period from 2005 to 2020 shows an average value of 6.730 m3/s. As can be seen in
Figure 10, there is a non-significant decreasing trend in the current streamflow. The
magnitude of Sen’s slope is −0.082 m3/year, which indicates a decreasing trend (Table 4).
 magnitude of Sen’s slope is −0.082 m3/year, which indicates a decreasing trend (Table 4).

Table 4. Mann-Kendall and Sen’s slope test results for streamflow trend.

Period Kendall’s Tau p-Value Sen’s Slope (m3/Year)

Water 2023, 15, 1586 1964–1979 −0.092 0.620 −0.051 13 of 18
2005–2020 −0.050 0.825 −0.078

14 14

12 12
streamflow (m3/s)

streamflow (m3/s)
10 10

8 8

6 6
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 19
4 4

2
1964 1969
The effective
1974
precipitation
1979
amplifies22005
the differences
2010
between2015
the two periods
2020
ob-
served in the average precipitation, as Figure 11 shows; furthermore the effective precip-
Years Years
itation trend is summarised in Table 5. Again, as in the case of discharge, rainfall is very
different and the trend is downward, but not significant.
(a) (b)
Table 5. Mann–Kendall and Sen’s slope test results for effective precipitation trend.
FigureFigure
10. Streamflow and trend
10. Streamflow and line
trendinline
black
in colour: (a) 1964–1979;
black colour: (b) 2005–2020.
(a) 1964–1979; (b) 2005–2020.
Period Kendall’s Tau p-Value Sen’s Slope (m3/Year)
−0.050
The effective precipitation
1964–1979 −0.822
amplifies the differences −1.807 observed
between the two periods
in the average precipitation,−0.067
2005–2020 as Figure 11 shows; furthermore
0.753 the effective precipitation
−2.395
trend is summarised in Table 5. Again, as in the case of discharge, rainfall is very different
and the trend is downward, but not significant.

1000 1000
900 900
800 800
effective rainfall (mm)

effective rainfall (mm)

700 700
600 600

500 500

400 400

300 300

200 200
1964 1969 1974 1979 2005 2010 2015 2020
Years Years
(a) (b)
Figure 11.11.
Figure Effective rainfall
Effective and
rainfall trend
and line
trend inin
line black colour:
black (a)(a)
colour: 1964–1979 (b)(b)
1964–1979 2005–2020.
2005–2020.

The
Table 5. trends of the effective
Mann–Kendall precipitation
and Sen’s slope turn
test results out to be
for effective very similar
precipitation to those of the
trend.
streamflow, at least on a first graphical analysis for the period 1964–1979, whereas, in the
period 2005–2020, Sen’s Slope and
Period the trend Kendall’s
is opposite Tau(Figure 11). Although
p-Value the trend is opposite
therefore suggests an increase in actual precipitation, this is actually not the (m3 /Year)
case since
precipitation increases due to higher
1964–1979 −0.050values from 2013−onwards.
0.822 If we analyse the aver-
−1.807
ages of the two periods, we note−that
2005–2020 0.067the period 1964–1979 0.753has an average actual −2.395precip-
itation of 615 mm, while for the period 2005–2020, the actual precipitation is 575 mm. This
result would assume
The trends in the
of the subsequent
effective streamflow
precipitation turn analysis
out to bethat
verythe flow rate
similar couldofbe
to those the
lower in the period 2005–2020 than in the period 1964–1979 if the effective precipitation
streamflow, at least on a first graphical analysis for the period 1964–1979, whereas, in the
amounts were respected
period 2005–2020, and showed
the trend a good
is opposite correlation
(Figure with the the
11). Although streamflow.
trend is opposite and
therefore suggests an increase in actual precipitation, this is actually not the case since
3.5. Analysis of the Relationship between Streamflow and Effective Precipitation and Averages of
the Analysed Parameters
Primarily, the correlation between streamflow and effective precipitation was tested
to assess whether the trend was in agreement. The correlation between streamflow and
Water 2023, 15, 1586 14 of 18

precipitation increases due to higher values from 2013 onwards. If we analyse the averages
of the two periods, we note that the period 1964–1979 has an average actual precipitation
of 615 mm, while for the period 2005–2020, the actual precipitation is 575 mm. This result
would assume in the subsequent streamflow analysis that the flow rate could be lower in
the period 2005–2020 than in the period 1964–1979 if the effective precipitation amounts
were respected and showed a good correlation with the streamflow.

3.5. Analysis of the Relationship between Streamflow and Effective Precipitation and Averages of
the Analysed Parameters
Primarily, the correlation between streamflow and effective precipitation was tested
to assess whether the trend was in agreement. The correlation between streamflow and
effective precipitation showed very high values for both periods, 0.798 for the period
Water 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW1964–1979 and 0.776 for the period 2005–2020 (Figure 12). Thus, the correlation is positive
15 of 19
and very similar for both periods, despite the mutual differences in precipitation values.

12 12

10 10
Streamflow (m3/s)

Streamflow (m3/s)

8 8

6 6

4 4

2 2

0 0
250 350 450 550 650 750 850 950 250 350 450 550 650 750 850 950

Effective rainfall (mm) Effective rainfall (mm)

(a) (b)
Figure
Figure 12.
12. Scatter
Scatter plots
plots showing
showing relationship
relationship between
between effective
effective precipitation
precipitation and
and streamflow,
streamflow, trend
trend
line in black colour: (a) 1964–1979 (b) 2005–2020).
line in black colour: (a) 1964–1979 (b) 2005–2020.

This testifies to the invariability of the correlations between flow rates and effective
rainfall in
in the
theabsence
absenceofofanthropogenic
anthropogenic abstraction
abstraction even
even at different
at different times,
times, despite
despite on-
ongoing
going
climateclimate
change.change. To aenable
To enable better aunderstanding
better understanding and reproducibility
and reproducibility of the the
of the research, re-
search, the table
table (Table (Tablethe
6) shows 6) shows theof
averages averages of all parameters
all parameters calculatedcalculated
for both for both
study study
periods
periods
(1964–1979(1964–1979 and 2005–2020).
and 2005–2020).

Table
Table 6.6.Table
Tablecomparing
comparing thethe averages
averages of the
of the variables
variables usedused foranalysis
for the the analysis over
over the twothe twoperiods
study study
periods (1964–1979;
(1964–1979; 2005–2020):
2005–2020): P = precipitation
P = precipitation (mm); T(mm);
= temperature (◦ C); ET(°C);
T = temperature p = ETp = evapotran-
evapotranspiration
spiration
(mm); ER(mm); ER = rainfall
= effective effective(mm);
rainfall
Q =(mm);
streamflow (m3 /s). (m /s).
Q = streamflow 3

Period
Period P
P T
T ETp
ETp ER
ER QQ
1964–1979 1159 12.2 544 615 7.6
1964–1979 1159 12.2 544 615 7.6
2005–2020
2005–2020 1134
1134 13.2
13.2 559
559 575
575 6.8
6.8

4. Discussion
4. Discussion
This
This research
research has
has highlighted
highlighted the
the possibility
possibility of
of analysing
analysing streamflows
streamflows within
within aa small
small
basin,
basin, as a function of climatic variables subject to anthropisation-induced changes.has
as a function of climatic variables subject to anthropisation-induced changes. It It
been shown
has been repeatedly
shown by by
repeatedly various
variousresearchers
researchersthat flow
that flowrates
ratesare
areinfluenced
influenced and
and thus
thus
dependent
dependent on climatic variables,
on climatic variables, in
in particular
particular temperature
temperature andand precipitation
precipitation [46].
[46]. The
The
evidence of streamflows and precipitation in this study is a weakly decreasing trend that
has been observed in other areas of the world [47], although this trend does not appear to
be unambiguous, as exactly opposite trends have been observed in other locations [46].
However, flow trends can also be strongly influenced by the exploitation of the water
resource, which can introduce disturbances that induce errors in the assessment of cli-
Water 2023, 15, 1586 15 of 18

evidence of streamflows and precipitation in this study is a weakly decreasing trend that
has been observed in other areas of the world [47], although this trend does not appear
to be unambiguous, as exactly opposite trends have been observed in other locations [46].
However, flow trends can also be strongly influenced by the exploitation of the water
resource, which can introduce disturbances that induce errors in the assessment of climate
change and its relationship to flow rates [48]. For this reason, special attention was paid in
this research to the absence of current and past exploitation of the water resource, thus only
the upstream part of the basin was analysed, a part that is known and demonstrated through
land use maps and population variations that has not been subject to substantial changes
in anthropogenic water abstraction. In the literature on the subject, there is a tendency to
favour surveys that are very extensive from a spatial point of view and rather general in
their assessment of the system, whereas in this case an attempt was made to cleanse the
flow data of other influences that may be purely natural, although not necessarily climatic.
In addition, in order to assess the precipitation over the analysed portion of the basin,
several rain gauges were taken, which allowed interpolations to be carried out; in this case
using geostatistical kriging methods, in particular taking into account the strong correlation
with altitude (used as an independent variable), hence cokriging was performed. Cokriging
is a statistical technique that is gaining increasing popularity in the scientific literature
for the interpolation of precipitation, often using very different independent variables
depending on the correlation in the specific area of analysis [49]. In this context, the results
of the present interpolation allow us to understand with certainty, given the excellent
value of the statistical indicators, MSE, RMSE, RMSSE and ASE, the amount of annual
precipitation in the basin. Several international studies have also analysed precipitation
within catchments using this method; however, these interpolations have often led to
poorer results in some months than those obtained in this research [50]. The estimation of
potential evapotranspiration in this research was carried out using Turc’s method, because
it is one of the most reliable and widely used for this estimation and has been found in
numerous studies on the subject [51]. The subtraction of the potential evapotranspiration
from the rainfall interpolation calculated on the upper course of the Potenza River basin
provided the effective rainfall value, which is indispensable for correlating it with the flow
data. Very often in the scientific literature, there is a tendency to correlate flow rates only
with rainfall [52,53], neglecting the temperature-related component of climate change that
could increase evapotranspiration and consequently decrease the water available for the
river in a given basin, as in this case. In particular, it was interesting to note that although
the effective precipitation has an increasing trend for the period 2005–2020 and a decreasing
trend for the period 1964–1979, it is nevertheless lower on average in the period 2005–2020,
which results in lower precipitation in the latter period and a direct relationship with
the streamflow very similar in terms of ratio to the period 1964–1979. In conclusion, the
results of this research show that the relationship between streamflow, precipitation and
temperature in the same reservoir tends to remain constant, although, in the context of
climate change, the quantities may vary, as also demonstrated in this study. The constancy
of the relationship between streamflow and precipitation can hardly ever be verified by
international studies, as it is subjected to the perturbations of the anthropogenic part, which
is very influential over rather long periods and does not allow the contributions of one or
the other component to be accurately divided [54]. Much more often though, there is a
tendency to assess on the basis of a reference period and emission scenarios, the evolution
of flow rates does not help operational management of the water resource in the short
term [55].

5. Conclusions
The primary aim of this study is to promote a methodology for analysing the time
series of river flows in relation to climatic variables. In particular, it is of interest to assess
the influence of climate change on river flows, by interpolating precipitation and calculating
potential evapotranspiration, in order to obtain values as close as possible to the amount of
Water 2023, 15, 1586 16 of 18

water that annually falls on the reservoir under investigation. This research aims to create a
methodology for analysis, but also to assess a basin with particular attention to the changes
it may have undergone over the years in terms of outflows, trying as far as possible to
choose parts of the reservoir without anthropic effects, thus analysing changes due only
to climate change. This operational method is aimed at understanding the influence of
climate change on river flows in small watersheds, as was completed for the pilot area
where two periods almost 30 years apart in time were compared, with no problems of
human-induced changes. It would be interesting in the future to find watersheds or parts
of them that can be considered free of man-made effects, by evaluating the correlations
between climate and precipitation, in order to obtain the actual influences between climate
and river flows for very large areas, and consequently to evaluate any flow changes under
different emission scenarios much more accurately. Currently, in order to assess the impact
of anthropogenic development on hydrology, there is fervent scientific research aimed at
defining models that can simulate past land use in the light of present land use, creating
a hydrometeorological model that can provide data corrected to remove anthropogenic
impact [56].

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.G., S.I.D. and Y.H.; methodology, M.G. and S.I.D.;
software, S.I.D.; validation, G.P. and M.B.; formal analysis, M.G.; investigation, S.I.D.; resources, M.G.;
data curation, M.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.G.; writing—review and editing, G.P. and
M.B.; visualization, S.I.D.; supervision, G.P. and M.B.; project administration, M.G.; All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Döll, P.; Fiedler, K.; Zhang, J. Global-scale analysis of river flow alterations due to water withdrawals and reservoirs. Hydrol.
Earth Syst. Sci. 2009, 13, 2413–2432. [CrossRef]
2. Mengistu, D.; Bewket, W.; Dosio, A.; Panitz, H.J. Climate change impacts on water resources in the upper blue nile (Abay) river
basin, ethiopia. J. Hydrol. 2021, 592, 125614. [CrossRef]
3. Feng, X.; Zhang, G.; Yin, X. Hydrological responses to climate change in Nenjiang river basin, northeastern China. Water Res.
Manag. 2011, 25, 677–689. [CrossRef]
4. Kundzewicz, Z.W.; Kanae, S.; Seneviratne, S.I.; Handmer, J.; Nicholls, N.; Peduzzi, P.; Mechler, R.; Bouwer, L.M.; Arnell, N.; Mach,
K.; et al. Le risque d’inondation et les perspectives de changement climatique mondial et régional. Hydrol. Sci. J. 2014, 59, 1–28.
[CrossRef]
5. Oki, T.; Kanae, S. Global hydrological cycles and world water resources. Science 2006, 313, 1068–1072. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Tao, H.; Gemmer, M.; Bai, Y.; Su, B.; Mao, W. Trends of streamflow in the Tarim River Basin during the past 50 years: Human
impact or climate change? J. Hydrol. 2011, 400, 1–9. [CrossRef]
7. Binder, L.C.W. Climate Change and Watershed Planning in Washington State 1. J. Am. Water Res. Assoc. 2006, 42, 915–926.
[CrossRef]
8. Barnett, T.P.; Adam, J.C.; Lettenmaier, D.P. Potential impacts of a warming climate on water availability in snow-dominated
regions. Nature 2005, 438, 303–309. [CrossRef]
9. Chiew, F.H.; McMahon, T.A. Global ENSO-streamflow teleconnection, streamflow forecasting and interannual variability. Hydrol.
Sci. J. 2002, 47, 505–522. [CrossRef]
10. Dai, A.; Qian, T.; Trenberth, K.E.; Milliman, J.D. Changes in continental freshwater discharge from 1948 to 2004. J. Clim. 2009, 22,
2773–2792. [CrossRef]
11. Fu, G.; Barber, M.E.; Chen, S. Hydro-climatic variability and trends in Washington State for the last 50 years. Hydrol. Process. 2010,
24, 866–878. [CrossRef]
12. Nohara, D.; Kitoh, A.; Hosaka, M.; Oki, T. Impact of climate change on river discharge projected by multimodel ensemble. J.
Hydrometeorol. 2006, 7, 1076–1089. [CrossRef]
13. Vogl, A.L.; Lopes, V.L. Impacts of water resources development on flow regimes in the Brazos River. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2009,
157, 331–345. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
14. Hannah, D.M.; Demuth, S.; van Lanen, H.A.; Looser, U.; Prudhomme, C.; Rees, G.; Stahl, K.; Tallaksen, L.M. Large-scale river
flow archives: Importance, current status and future needs. Hydrol. Process. 2011, 25, 1191–1200. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 1586 17 of 18

15. Marsh, T.J. Capitalising on river flow data to meet changing national needs—A UK perspective. Flow Meas. Instrum. 2002, 13,
291–298. [CrossRef]
16. Stahl, K.; Hisdal, H.; Hannaford, J.; Tallaksen, L.M.; van Lanen, H.A.J.; Sauquet, E.; Demuth, S.; Fendekova, M.; Jódar, J.
Streamflow trends in Europe: Evidence from a dataset of near-natural catchments. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci. 2010, 14, 2367–2382.
[CrossRef]
17. Rojas, R.; Feyen, L.; Bianchi, A.; Dosio, A. Assessment of future flood hazard in Europe using a large ensemble of bias-corrected
regional climate simulations. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 2012, 117, D17109.
18. Blöschl, G.; Hall, J.; Viglione, A.; Perdigão, R.A.P.; Parajka, J.; Merz, B.; Lun, D.; Arheimer, B.; Aronica, G.T.; Bilibashi, A.; et al.
Changing climate both increases and decreases European river floods. Nature 2019, 573, 108–111. [CrossRef]
19. Blöschl, G.; Gaál, L.; Hall, J.; Kiss, A.; Komma, J.; Nester, T.; Parajka, J.; Perdigão, R.A.P.; Plavcová, L.; Rogger, M.; et al. Increasing
river floods: Fiction or reality? Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 2015, 2, 329–344. [CrossRef]
20. Gentilucci, M.; Barbieri, M.; Burt, P. Climate and territorial suitability for the Vineyards developed using GIS techniques. In
Proceeding of the Conference of the Arabian Journal of Geosciences; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 11–13.
21. Reidsma, P.; Ewert, F.; Lansink, A.O.; Leemans, R. Adaptation to climate change and climate variability in European agriculture:
The importance of farm level responses. Eur. J. Agron. 2010, 32, 91–102. [CrossRef]
22. Gentilucci, M.; Moustafa, A.A.; Abdel-Gawad, F.K.; Mansour, S.R.; Coppola, M.R.; Caserta, L.; Inglese, S.; Pambianchi, G.;
Guerriero, G. Advances in Egyptian mediterranean coast climate change monitoring. Water 2021, 13, 1870. [CrossRef]
23. Gentilucci, M.; Parisi, C.; Coppola, M.R.; Majdoubi, F.Z.; Madonna, A.; Guerriero, G. Influence of mediterranean sea temperature
increase on Gaeta Gulf (Tyrrhenian Sea) biodiversity. Proc. Zool. Soc. 2021, 74, 91–103. [CrossRef]
24. Antonetti, G.; Gentilucci, M.; Aringoli, D.; Pambianchi, G. Analysis of landslide Susceptibility and Tree Felling Due to an Extreme
Event at Mid-Latitudes: Case Study of Storm Vaia, Italy. Land 2022, 11, 1808. [CrossRef]
25. Bračko, T.; Žlender, B.; Jelušič, P. Implementation of Climate Change Effects on Slope Stability Analysis. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 8171.
[CrossRef]
26. Gentilucci, M.; Barbieri, M.; Materazzi, M.; Pambianchi, G. Effects of Climate Change on Vegetation in the Province of Macerata
(Central Italy). In Advanced Studies in Efficient Environmental Design and City Planning; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp.
463–474.
27. Theurillat, J.P.; Guisan, A. Potential impact of climate change on vegetation in the European Alps: A review. Clim. Chang. 2001,
50, 77–109. [CrossRef]
28. Fagerberg, J.; Laestadius, S.; Martin, B.R. The triple challenge for Europe: The economy, climate change, and governance. Challenge
2016, 59, 178–204. [CrossRef]
29. Gentilucci, M.; D’Aprile, F. Variations in trends of temperature and its influence on tree growth in the Tuscan Apennines. Arab. J.
Geosci. 2021, 14, 1418. [CrossRef]
30. Lionello, P.; Scarascia, L. The relation between climate change in the Mediterranean region and global warming. Reg. Environ.
Chang. 2018, 18, 1481–1493. [CrossRef]
31. Gorguner, M.; Kavvas, M.L. Modeling impacts of future climate change on reservoir storages and irrigation water demands in a
Mediterranean basin. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 748, 141246. [CrossRef]
32. Javadian, M.; Behrangi, A.; Smith, W.K.; Isher, J.B. Global trends in evapotranspiration dominated by increases across large
cropland regions. Remote Sens. 2020, 12, 1221. [CrossRef]
33. Yue, T.X.; Zhao, N.; Ramsey, R.D.; Wang, C.L.; Fan, Z.M.; Chen, C.F.; Lu, Y.M.; Li, B.L. Climate change trend in China, with
improved accuracy. Clim. Chang. 2013, 120, 137–151. [CrossRef]
34. Bhutiyani, M.R.; Kale, V.S.; Pawar, N.J. Climate change and the precipitation variations in the northwestern Himalaya: 1866–2006.
Int. J. Climatol. 2010, 30, 535–548. [CrossRef]
35. Tabari, H. Climate change impact on flood and extreme precipitation increases with water availability. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13768.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
36. Grazzini, F.; Craig, G.C.; Keil, C.; Antolini, G.; Pavan, V. Extreme precipitation events over northern Italy. Part I: A systematic
classification with machine-learning techniques. Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 2020, 146, 69–85. [CrossRef]
37. Gentilucci, M.; Barbieri, M.; D’Aprile, F.; Zardi, D. Analysis of extreme precipitation indices in the Marche region (central Italy),
combined with the assessment of energy implications and hydrogeological risk. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 804–810. [CrossRef]
38. Cheng, L.; AghaKouchak, A. Nonstationary precipitation intensity-duration-frequency curves for infrastructure design in a
changing climate. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 7093. [CrossRef]
39. Olmstead, S.M. Climate change adaptation and water resource management: A review of the literature. Energy Econ. 2014, 46,
500–509. [CrossRef]
40. Brandolini, P.; Cevasco, A.; Firpo, M.; Robbiano, A.; Sacchini, A. Geo-hydrological risk management for civil protection purposes
in the urban area of Genoa (Liguria, NW Italy). Nat. Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2012, 12, 943–959. [CrossRef]
41. Aguilar, E.; Auer, I.; Brunet, M.; Peterson, T.C.; Wieringa, J. Guidance on Metadata and Homogenization; WMOv (World Meteorologi-
cal Organization): Geneva, Switzerland, 2003.
42. Gentilucci, M.; Catorci, A.; Panichella, T.; Moscatelli, S.; Hamed, Y.; Missaoui, R.; Pambianchi, G. Analysis of Snow Cover in the
Sibillini Mountains in Central Italy. Climate 2023, 11, 72. [CrossRef]
43. Goovaerts, P. Ordinary Cokriging Revisited. Math. Geol. 1998, 30, 21–42. [CrossRef]
Water 2023, 15, 1586 18 of 18

44. Turc, L. Calcul du bilan de l’eau évaluation en fonction des précipitations et des températures. IAHS Publ. 1954, 37, 88–200.
45. Gentilucci, M.; Barbieri, M.; Burt, P.; D’Aprile, F. Preliminary data validation and reconstruction of temperature and precipitation
in Central Italy. Geosciences 2018, 8, 202. [CrossRef]
46. Novotny, E.V.; Stefan, H.G. Stream flow in Minnesota: Indicator of climate change. J. Hydrol. 2007, 334, 319–333. [CrossRef]
47. Esvandzibaie, F.; Farajzadeh, M.; Ghavidel, Y. Analysis of temporal and spatial changes of precipitation and flow rate in arid
regions with a statistical approach (case study: Central Plateau catchment area of Iran). Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 19,
6803–6824. [CrossRef]
48. Ortega, J.A.; Razola, L.; Garzón, G. Recent human impacts and change in dynamics and morphology of ephemeral rivers. Nat.
Hazards Earth Syst. Sci. 2014, 14, 713–730. [CrossRef]
49. Usowicz, B.; Lipiec, J.; Łukowski, M.; Słomiński, J. Improvement of spatial interpolation of precipitation distribution using
cokriging incorporating rain-gauge and satellite (SMOS) soil moisture data. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 1039. [CrossRef]
50. Adhikary, S.K.; Muttil, N.; Yilmaz, A.G. Cokriging for enhanced spatial interpolation of rainfall in two Australian catchments.
Hydrol. Process. 2017, 31, 2143–2161. [CrossRef]
51. Dimitriadou, S.; Nikolakopoulos, K.G. Annual actual evapotranspiration estimation via GIS models of three empirical methods
employing remotely sensed data for the peloponnese, Greece, and comparison with annual MODIS ET and pan evaporation
measurements. ISPRS Int. J. Geo-Inf. 2021, 10, 522. [CrossRef]
52. Zhang, Q.; Singh, V.P.; Sun, P.; Chen, X.; Zhang, Z.; Li, J. Precipitation and streamflow changes in China: Changing patterns,
causes and implications. J. Hydrol. 2011, 410, 204–216. [CrossRef]
53. Han, H.; Hou, J.; Huang, M.; Li, Z.; Xu, K.; Zhang, D.; Xu, K.; Zhang, D.; Bai, G.; Wang, C. Impact of soil and water conservation
measures and precipitation on streamflow in the middle and lower reaches of the Hulu River Basin, China. Catena 2020, 195,
104792. [CrossRef]
54. Santos, R.M.B.; Fernandes, L.S.; Moura, J.P.; Pereira, M.G.; Pacheco, F.A.L. The impact of climate change, human interference, scale
and modeling uncertainties on the estimation of aquifer properties and river flow components. J. Hydrol. 2014, 519, 1297–1314.
[CrossRef]
55. Schnorbus, M.; Werner, A.; Bennett, K. Impacts of climate change in three hydrologic regimes in British Columbia, Canada.
Hydrol. Process. 2014, 28, 1170–1189. [CrossRef]
56. Ceppi, A.; Gambini, E.; Lombardi, G.; Ravazzani, G.; Mancini, M. (SOL40: Forty Years of Simulations under Climate and Land
Use Change. Water 2022, 14, 837. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.