A Review on Nonstationary Flood Frequency Analysis under Climate and Catchment Change
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66132/ngce20260105Keywords:
Climate change, Design flood, Extreme value analysis, GAMLASSAbstract
Flood frequency analysis has traditionally relied on the assumption that hydrological extremes fluctuate within a stationary probabilistic regime, allowing past observations to serve as a basis for estimating future flood risk. That assumption has become increasingly questionable in many river basins affected by climate change, land-use transformation, urbanization, river regulation, and evolving hydroclimatic variability. In response, nonstationary flood frequency analysis has emerged as a major research area in modern hydrology. This review critically examines the conceptual basis, statistical frameworks, covariate strategies, uncertainty sources, and practical implications of nonstationary flood frequency analysis. It discusses the hydrological mechanisms that generate nonstationarity, evaluates methodological developments including time-varying extreme value models, generalized additive models for location, scale and shape, Bayesian approaches, and regional methods, and assesses the opportunities and limitations of machine learning and hybrid frameworks. The review argues that nonstationary analysis should not be treated as a universal replacement for stationary frequency methods, but as a context-dependent approach that must be justified by hydrological evidence, physically meaningful covariates, and decision relevance. Particular attention is given to uncertainty, because flexible nonstationary models often improve in-sample fit while weakening extrapolative reliability. The review concludes that future progress depends on stronger process-statistics integration, more disciplined covariate selection, clearer reporting standards, and a shift from fixed return periods toward design-life risk and reliability-based planning. These directions are essential if nonstationary flood frequency analysis is to become a robust tool for hydrologic design and flood risk management.
Downloads
References
Bayazit, M. (2015). Nonstationarity of hydrological records and recent trends in trend analysis: A state-of-the-art review. Environmental Processes, 2(3), 527-542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40710-015-0081-7
Chen, M., Papadakis, K., & Qiao, J. (2021). An investigation on the non-stationarity of flood frequency across the UK. Journal of Hydrology, 597, 126309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126309
Coles, S. (2001). An introduction to statistical modeling of extreme values. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-3675-0
Gilroy, K. L., & McCuen, R. H. (2012). A nonstationary flood frequency analysis method to adjust for future climate change and urbanization. Journal of Hydrology, 414-415, 40-48. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2011.10.009
Hosking, J. R. M., & Wallis, J. R. (1997). Regional frequency analysis An approach based on L-moments. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511529443
Katz, R. W., Parlange, M. B., & Naveau, P. (2002). Statistics of extremes in hydrology. Advances in Water Resources, 25(8-12), 1287-1304. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0309-1708(02)00056-8
López, J., & Francés, F. (2013). Non-stationary flood frequency analysis in continental Spanish rivers using climate and reservoir indices as external covariates. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(8), 3189-3203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-17-3189-2013
Merz, B., & Blöschl, G. (2008). Flood frequency hydrology 1 Temporal, spatial, and causal expansion of information. Water Resources Research, 44(8), W08432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006744
Merz, B., & Blöschl, G. (2008). Flood frequency hydrology 2 Combining data and expanding flood information. Water Resources Research, 44(8), W08433. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1029/2007WR006745
Milly, P. C. D., Betancourt, J., Falkenmark, M., Hirsch, R. M., Kundzewicz, Z. W., Lettenmaier, D. P., & Stouffer, R. J. (2008). Stationarity is dead Whither water management. Science, 319(5863), 573-574. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1151915
Read, L. K., & Vogel, R. M. (2015). Reliability, return periods, and risk under nonstationarity. Water Resources Research, 51(8), 6381-6398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2015WR017089
Renard, B., & Lall, U. (2014). Regional frequency analysis conditioned on large-scale atmospheric or oceanic fields. Water Resources Research, 50(12), 9536-9554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/2014WR016277
Rigby, R. A., & Stasinopoulos, D. M. (2005). Generalized additive models for location, scale and shape. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series C Applied Statistics, 54(3), 507-554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9876.2005.00510.x
Rootzén, H., & Katz, R. W. (2013). Design life level Quantifying risk in a changing climate. Water Resources Research, 49(9), 5964-5972. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20425
Salas, J. D., & Obeysekera, J. (2014). Revisiting the concepts of return period and risk for nonstationary hydrologic extreme events. Journal of Hydrologic Engineering, 19(3), 554-568. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000820
Serinaldi, F., & Kilsby, C. G. (2015). Stationarity is undead Uncertainty dominates the distribution of extremes. Advances in Water Resources, 77, 17-36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2014.12.013
Villarini, G., Smith, J. A., Baeck, M. L., Sturdevant-Rees, P., & Krajewski, W. F. (2010). Analyses of annual maximum daily discharge records for detecting changes in extreme floods. Journal of Hydrology, 399(3-4), 286-297.
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 NG Civil Engineering

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.